You chose a pointless either/or when the real problem is that numbers of consumers aren't paying yet can enjoy the products.
Yet time after time we read reports of record revenues and profits despite so many not paying. We also read reports of all that free consumption driving those consumers' purchases, as it acts as advertising or previews allowing consumers to choose what they wish to purchase.
Those like you just can't stand it when we refuse to be manipulated by your bosses.
Not even the projects (film/TV) themselves necessarily credit everyone involved.
Often people who make a significant contribution don't make the cut because of limited credit space and politics. If you want a sense on how limited space is, check out the wall of text for VFX artists part of the credit roll in a blockbuster feature near you - it's not because they didn't do much.
The cast and crew pages on services like IMDb do allow for people who aren't credited to claim participation, however it can hardly be considered a full and complete picture.
I prefer my credit where it matters, in the credits for the piece. IMDb et al. provide a useful reference but are most definitely not canon.
When you realize that TV shows exist as nothing but filler for the time between commercials, you should also realize that none of them are worth watching anyway. TV isn't worth watching unless your goal is to inundate your brain with mostly mindless eye-candy (or maybe there's something on PBS).
"... the video was ordered to be deleted instead of just blocking the piece of information in question."
Yet this is a university. Did no-one even consider sequestering the information far locked away from public eyes while this tempest morphed into little more than a dewey, foggy morning mist? There's an IT/CS faculty at Purdue, isn't there, and no-one considered consulting them?
It's bizarre watching this happening in the former home of the free, land of the brave.
Connie Willis wrote a book called Remake set in the future in which the main character works for Hollywood studios doing CGI bowdlerizing by replacing alcohol and cigarettes with less controversial products.
And watch NSA employees/contractors get into major car accidents as they swerve to avoid their eyes from catching even a glimpse of that 'classified' information!
I think a lot of things about advertising's ubiquity these days, but "terrorist attack" is seldom one of them. This is a great, "Go ahead, shoot the other foot now!" moment. Government functionaries appear to have been infected by the Suicide Squad propensities of "Life of Brian", or the Dodos in that cartoon about mastodons, lemurs, and sabretooth tigers. It'd be funny if they weren't armed to the teeth while doing it.
Perhaps this shouldn't have been a reply to your reply. I have no problem with you considering the guy to be an abusive jerk. I consider it bad form for Tim to use those words in an article where his main point is that the university messed up.
>Doesn't trying to copyright yoga defeat the entire original point of yoga?
Yes, copyrighting it is extremely silly. This is obviously a trademark: this particular sequence of moves is intended to identify the brainwashing technique of this particular practitioner, and (so long as suitable reincarnations are arranged) can be controlled forever.
"Unfortunately, there is your idealism and then there is reality. You also have some misconceptions about the US and where the ideas that form the basis of 'your society' actually come from..."
Ah, well, when I say "our", I mean western democratic society, including the US, that's why I also said Parliament/Congress and not only Parliament.
I think that the US has proper core values, even if their citizens (and governments) forget about them.
Still, I know it's idealism. But you see:
"I'd rather strive to turn an utopia into reality, than make the current reality an utopia."
Women's rights were pure idealism (worse than mine) a century ago. Now, while they aren't perfect and they can be better, at least they are considered intelligent and rational persons, the same as men.
Before they weren't allowed an education, for example, because many men considered them more stupid than chimpanzees.
Yesterday's idealism can turn into tomorrow's reality if we fight for it hard enough.
"The US was founded..........However naive & misguided this might be...)."
In the EU there are a lot of movements like that. Some got political representation too, such as the Green Party or EFA, that advocate for separation of powers, plus they are pretty hardcore on citizens' rights.
And there are parties like the Tea Party too, that advocate similar points of view.
"Why? Because EU countries have Civil Services.............bureaucracy to manage the state."
Well, I can't say whose is better.
You see, if the president apoints them, it means that they will favour the party that put them there first, because they care about their jobs, not the citizens.
In many EU countries, the ruling government appoints specific directors and top civil servants too in many cases.
Still, the idea behind civil services is to make sure that they are kept neutral, because they have a lot of power that can be used.
See this way: president appointed civil services could be used against opposing parties and dissenters. They are loyal to their party, and thus, they can use the power given to them to keep that party ruling.
And well, what you're telling me about civil services bringing massive surveillance... hasn't that happened already in the US?
Don't the NSA, FBI and other bodies consider themselves the protectors of the citizens and that they got the right to monitor them?
Aren't those bodies more worried with their power and keeping their jobs that serving the citizens?
Isn't your police the same with that "us or them" mentality?
You see, surveillance has nothing to do with having civil services or not. As you see, the US has plenty of it even if you appoint most of your civil servants.
Btw, I'm not sure about what the civil servants do in other countries. In mine? They just want to do their job without complicating things. Why bother? Their job is safe and their pay is a decent one. And they even got labour rights!
"As far as private companies ability to track you, that is a contract between you and the company. Even in the EU, it's possible to do this (cf. AVG). It has nothing to do with jurisdiction - Google can track you in the EU, even in Germany, since you agreed to this when you started to use their service...."
They can track you. But they aren't allowed to share that data with 3rd parties without a valid reason, and neither without your express consent when they do so (no, a simple blog entry doesn't count, they have to ask you specifically and you got the right to make them delete all the data they have about you).
The AVG thingy? It's been just 2 weeks. Wait until the Data Privacy Watchdogs catch up on that. We are talking about the guys that got through that "right to be forgotten" thing.
And yet, let's say that due to citizen pressure or whatever, we want to toughen privacy laws. The data being on EU servers gives the EU citizens some power over it.
I'm a bit late in getting to this article, but also wanted to add besides the barrier of journal subscription fees to access useful articles, practitioners in limited resource settings may also face other access limitations, including: (1) Knowing that such resources are available and where they are housed; (2) being able to access them due to infrastructure challenges (e.g., unreliable Internet, electricity, etc.). In short, there are more challenges beyond publication fees that, I hope, will be taken into consideration as well.