This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Learn_more) has just been brought to my attention while trying to access wikipedia. It seems like a lot of websites are protesting SOPA and PIPA. Personally, I think this blackout thing is a pretty awesome idea.
You gotta love the U.S. Government ::)
I'm staging my own little protest against SOPA where I refuse to post anything in General Discussion that is interesting, helpful or funny. Actually, I've been protesting against SOPA for 5 years...
Stupot, you fool! That's precisely what SOPA is all about! By not posting anything interesting, helpful, or funny, you are supporting SOPA.
SOPA is dangerous because it's worded so vaguely. Anyone who understands the first thing about the way US legislation works would see that as a major red flag. Particularly it's dangerous to open-source projects because if the project were deemed to be "supporting" piracy/copyright infringement/etc. in any way (even in such a way that "supporting" just means "not explicitly preventing"), the entire project could be officially deemed illegal.
Anyway, it's good to see that the Internet is standing up for itself.
Fuck SOPA and fuck PIPA.
Quote from: ddq on Wed 18/01/2012 09:38:19
Fuck SOPA and fuck PIPA.
Remember to use a condom!
But in all seriousness: the SOPA and PIPA seem to me much like the good old Patriot Act. A huge fuss, massive waste of resources and time, and no real impact, other than some minor negative ones. There is much potential for misuse, but I don't see this as an any more massive threat than previous legislations.
What we need is a global legislative that can and MUST be reinforced by each country in the world, in which countries MUST take action to stop any and all illegal file traffic withing their borders by persecuting the servers that connect users of P2P and torrent networks to one another in networks that transfer illegal material. I believe this would lead first into a situation where all P2P networks would be brought down one by one due to illegal traffic, driver underground and hunted down through infiltration and monitoring. This will bring down internet traffic in general too, which is a good thing for connection speeds. Afterwards, new P2P networks could rise; ones that have strict policies about trafficing illegal files (copyrighted material etc) and means of reporting users that break terms of service.
In WHAM-land, anyone caught downloading or sharing illegal or copyrighted material would be banned from having a high-speed internet connection for a year at a time, their connection speed capped at 512 kb / second or lower. Repeat offenders would get temporarily banned from the internet altogether, effectively excommunicating such individuals from most social circles and media outlets, as well as receiving serious monetary fines (the proceedings of which would be used to fund more effective monitoring of network traffic and reinforcing the LAW).
And if all else fails, we shoot the perpetrators on the streets for being assholes and not taking a hint.
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 09:53:03
But in all seriousness: the SOPA and PIPA seem to me much like the good old Patriot Act. A huge fuss, massive waste of resources and time, and no real impact, other than some minor negative ones.
Right...."no real impact, other than some minor negative ones"... Invasion of Irak and Afghanistan (where are the WMD's, by the way?), illegal detentions, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib... What do you consider a "real impact", the Holocaust???????????
...Hmmm, I get it... No US citizens (except soldiers, but they're expendable), so it's ok... Right?
Quote from: Noctambulo on Wed 18/01/2012 11:34:20
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 09:53:03
But in all seriousness: the SOPA and PIPA seem to me much like the good old Patriot Act. A huge fuss, massive waste of resources and time, and no real impact, other than some minor negative ones.
Right...."no real impact, other than some minor negative ones"... Invasion of Irak and Afghanistan (where are the WMD's, by the way?), illegal detentions, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib... What do you consider a "real impact", the Holocaust???????????
...Hmmm, I get it... No US citizens (except soldiers, but they're expendable), so it's ok... Right?
Uhhhh... Do you know what the Patriot Act is? The Patriot Act was created as a set of rules and regulations that act in the US, allowing the police and FBI to more easily aquire information on citizens suspected of connection to terrorist organizations, and is not directly involved with invading Irak or Afganistan. Calm down, man!
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 11:41:21Uhhhh... Do you know what the Patriot Act is? The Patriot Act was created as a set of rules and regulations that act in the US, allowing the police and FBI to more easily aquire information on citizens suspected of connection to terrorist organizations, and is not directly involved with invading Irak or Afganistan. Calm down, man!
Yes, I know what the Patriot Act is: Just a step into the "war on terror". Basically, It's "Mein Kampf" to Holocaust all over again. The main difference is that the people now have things like, say, internet.
And maybe it's easy to you be calm about the loss of freedom because it is a great bussines for some people, but I'm not like that... Or (I want to believe this) you just don't know what the Patriot Act REALLY implies.
Quote from: Noctambulo on Wed 18/01/2012 12:21:22
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 11:41:21Uhhhh... Do you know what the Patriot Act is? The Patriot Act was created as a set of rules and regulations that act in the US, allowing the police and FBI to more easily aquire information on citizens suspected of connection to terrorist organizations, and is not directly involved with invading Irak or Afganistan. Calm down, man!
Yes, I know what the Patriot Act is: Just a step into the "war on terror". Basically, It's "Mein Kampf" to Holocaust all over again. The main difference is that the people now have things like, say, internet.
And maybe it's easy to you be calm about the loss of freedom because it is a great bussines for some people, but I'm not like that... Or (I want to believe this) you just don't know what the Patriot Act REALLY implies.
I find it quite hard to believe you truly understand the patriot act. You are basically comparing the written works of a deranged, although ingenius, German / Austrian military and political leader to a law passed in the United States. I think the difference in both scope and purpose here is quite noticeable.
All I know of the Patriot act is what Wikipedia tells me. It has a very broad and well analyzed view on the matter and I can understand how some people, especially people who have something to hide, would see the Patriot Act as a negative thing. However, it is a step towards more nationwide security in the US. Here in Finland a slightly similiar thing was passed into law a year or two ago, although on a smaller scale (only regards electronic surveillance of e-mail and such at workplaces).
But WHAM, even your rendition would have terrible missuse and a lot of gray and illegal areas that actually contribute to a certain product, not to mention stuff that is maybe unavailable by no other means than stuff like torrenting etc.
Examples
- loads of musicians might get their music pirated, but lots of those people actually later pay concert tickets that have a higher price than an album, not to mention buying the music legally later,
- watching stuff that you can't have access to in other ways, such as documentaries (which I might catch on one of the Viasat or Discovery channels but it's hard),
- stuff that's limited to USA, for example hulu videos but also distribution limited productions,
- then there's loads of stuff that perhaps happens live but you can't get it any other way, can I for example buy all episodes of SNL or similar, how about streams of concert that again might be limited to a coutnry, how about tirbute videos (which actually get a lot of people pumped for a games, movies, music etc. all that would potentially be gone, infact in your case it would be
- I heard of a show that is on in USA, I can't watch it unless I - buy it of let say amazon, where I have to spend lots of money for the whole season a year later or about a year or more later to watch it on our television networks, of which some usually don't show the whole season (they sometimes interrupt it for no reason). And then I get it legally and watch the commercials.
- how about music that's on say a record and I don't have a record player?
- how about tutorial videos for a software, that helps the software developer directly by making their product acccesible and easier to learn
This is not about making money, it's about making even more money (deserving or not).
Btw 512 is not low, up until a year ago that was the speed limit on my net connection.
WHAM:
There's this guy that died recently who left a big power vacuum that's not nearly filled by his son. Maybe you could apply there?
On topic:
From what I've read, SOPA and PIPA will
-make venture capitalists refrain from investing in internet startups
-force any site that features user-generated content to police their own site, which forces huge liability costs onto countless Internet companies
-decimate the open source community
-outlaw the use of programs that allow democratic movements in oppressive countries to circumvent internet blockades
-allow ISPs to block sites on a hunch because the site is competition to their own business
-punish millions of innocent users who have never done anything illegal online
On the other hand, they won't do what they're supposed to do, so there isn't even an upside.
What I find hilarious is that the U.S. Government is funding projects to circumvent internet censorship in countries like China, while these bills propose creating the same kind of censorship.
Spread the word. More people need to be aware of this continual struggle by western governments against freedom of speech.
@ Anian:
I understand that there are exeptions, but let me respond to at least one of your examples: Music.
I believe this should be up to the musicians themselves to decide. There are bands who publish their own music and release much of their material FOR FREE (Machinae Supremacy, for example) and are ok with their material being distributed. Free distribution is part of their business plan and chosen method and they have confidence that ticket and record sales will hold up (and they have) despite the free distribution.
However, some labels and artists do not WANT to use this method and I believe they should have the right to decide what is legal and what is not when it comes to material THEY PRODUCE. It's their livelihood and they should have that chouse. Piracy takes away the choise. This also applies on documentaries, movies, TV shows and area restricted material: It's the choise of the publisher and the choise should remain available.
@Khris:
I understand that people worry about SOPA and admit that yes, its wording should be changed to a more uniform and clear shape before being passed into law, so that misuse is not as easy (hell, it should not be possible at all!) but then again: what we have seen in these SOPA protests is people reacting to a perceived threar, even though there is no proof to show that the response is justified. To me the SOPA response seems like people crying out "all guns should be banned because they can harm people", while ignoring any positive effects that might also be available (in case of guns: "You come into my house through the window in the middle of the night, I want to be able to defend myself until the police arrive!")
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 09:53:03
In WHAM-land, anyone caught downloading or sharing illegal or copyrighted material would be banned from having a high-speed internet connection for a year at a time, their connection speed capped at 512 kb / second or lower. Repeat offenders would get temporarily banned from the internet altogether, effectively excommunicating such individuals from most social circles and media outlets, as well as receiving serious monetary fines (the proceedings of which would be used to fund more effective monitoring of network traffic and reinforcing the LAW).
And if all else fails, we shoot the perpetrators on the streets for being assholes and not taking a hint.
Quote
shoot the perpetrators on the streets
And so, on that day, fifty years ago, fire was stolen from the hands of the people and given back to the gods. The flow of information stopped, for the common man was afraid anything that they shared with another might be considered contraband and shot. People no longer sung in the streets or referenced things that they liked, as copyright hung over their heads like the Sword of Damocles. Any performance could snap the string, ending their existance, and sending the message the corporations always wanted - that ideas were theirs, and all who expressed them had the wrath of the gods brought down upon them.
In an increasingly connected world, we were isolated. Unable to publically speak as all ideas were copyright. We thought that this would protect us, emancipate us but all it did was imprison us in a nightmare of vague claims to ownership by indominable monsters.
We were reduced to passive consumers, no longer could we use the tools we were given to create new things, but instead paid for the privilige of watching the gods dance in front of them. Anything could be taken from men, the gods could create scarcity, and thus charge whatever price they desired for the gifts they could so easily take away. But the price for this had already been paid.
Chained to the highest skyscraper, his liver torn out by eagles every day, broadcast globally, was the image of the original thief, a symbol of the new age, the rage of the gods against man, cravenly looking on with awe and terror:
The Postmodern Prometheus®
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 13:12:24
To me the SOPA response seems like people crying out "all guns should be banned because they can harm people", while ignoring any positive effects that might also be available (in case of guns: "You come into my house through the window in the middle of the night, I want to be able to defend myself until the police arrive!")
All I've got to say to this is that here in England guns ARE banned because they can harm people and we've only had one attempted assassination on our prime-minister (the English version of a president) which failed unfortunately. You almost never hear anything thing to do with shooting or gangs riding down the street shooting, like you hear in America all the time. So you're telling me the ability to be able to buy guns from your local supermarket is a good thing. I must admit being able to defend your home from thieves would be nice (something which you're not allowed to do for some reason in England) but if you can buy guns, so can the thieves and that's your problem, right there.
As for SOPA and PIPA, I hope they don't pass for numerous reasons.
Quote from: Danvzare on Wed 18/01/2012 13:35:21
So you're telling me the ability to be able to buy guns from your local supermarket is a good thing. I must admit being able to defend your home from thieves would be nice (something which you're not allowed to do for some reason in England) but if you can buy guns, so can the thieves and that's your problem, right there.
England is a special case primarily due to it being an island, which makes monitoring incoming packages easier and thus it is harder to get illegal firearms into the country as a whole. But here in continental europe, do you really think making guns ILLEGAL will keep criminals who make their living by BREAKING THE LAW from getting guns? ;D
http://sopastrike.com/
Black out your websites today. Spread the word!
Re: The Patriot Act not having any big impacts.
Tell that to the people detained indefinitely with no charge for liteally *years*.. Although I guess WHAM would be fine with that if they threatened 'the regime'
In my opinion Any form of censor is bad for humanity, let alone allowing greedy corporations to take away the freedom to live and express of any civilian. This thing needs to go away. Patriot act? Same deal.
QuoteIt has a very broad and well analyzed view on the matter and I can understand how some people, especially people who have something to hide, would see the Patriot Act as a negative thing. However, it is a step towards more nationwide security in the US.
No. Just no. Coupled with the National Defense Authorization Act, America is now designated a 'battlefield' and American citizens may now officially (NB: Obama seized the power to assassinate American citizens previously with an Executive Order which he used to kill Anwar Al-Awlaki and his teenage son) be arrested and indefinitely detained outside of American soil on the mere accusation of terrorist involvement
without a writ of habeas corpus or a trial. This completely defies the 6th and 12th Amendments of the Constitution.
Hopefully trying to keep this on-topic...
Under SOPA, if I were to upload a music video of, say The Foo Fighters, to YouTube, then not only myself, but YouTube could be held legally responsible. The entirety of YouTube could (and would) be marked as a piracy site, and would be inaccessible.
Under SOPA, if I posted song lyrics to my Facebook, then not only myself, but Facebook could be held legally responsible. Facebook could potentially face near-instantaneous shut down.
Under SOPA, projects like the Kings Quest remakes would open up sites like this one to being shut down for supporting piracy.
...is there anyone that doesn't see a problem here?
SOPA is not just written too broadly by accident. This legislation was intentionally written so that political parties can reenact the Salem Witch Trials, the McCarthy trials, and the like, all via the information superhighway. SOPA is a direct and blatant attack on our freedom of speech and press. I honestly doubt it's going to pass with all the petitions and the like that are going around. I'm glad that people are actually recognizing how dangerous this legislation truly is.
Yes, there is nothing well-meant with SOPA. Please understand, for those of you who doubt the ulterior motives of some of America's senators, that some of them are either so utterly out of touch with the technical world or in the pockets of the very people lobbying for this to happen. One such tool of the industry is Jay Rockefeller, who said of the internet, and I quote "Almost makes you ask the question wouldn't it have been better if we never invented the internet?" while addressing congress over the National Hazard that he and others like him see as the internet.
Make no mistake, this isn't purely a piracy issue. Piracy is a part of it, but there are laws in place to catch and prosecute pirates already and we see cases of this in the news every day. Piracy isn't the only issue here, it's also information control.
On one hand, America will completely lambaste China for any kind of internet censorship while on the other it is actively pursuing measures that are, in many ways, even more draconian than China's policies. It's the old bait and switch tactic of pretending to be for one thing while actually being for another. Fortunately, millions of Americans are awake to this trick and are protesting SOPA, PIPA, and other ugly bills offered up under the guise of protecting national security. This isn't merely an America issue, either; if bills like this succeed here you may be sure to see similar ones heading before your parliaments, regional governments, and so on. The damage these bills are capable of cannot be sufficiently undone because once government gets a sufficient handhold it will not easily let go.
I happen to believe that protests and educational videos work, so if there are those of you who believe this will not affect you because you're not in America, I encourage you to wake up and take action while you can still type your thoughts and make your videos unfiltered.
Quote from: Radiant on Wed 18/01/2012 14:40:30
http://sopastrike.com/
Black out your websites today. Spread the word!
Yes. Everyone should do this. I blacked out my site, which should help spread the word to practically dozens of people. ;)
SOPA sucks. >:(
Everyone should be cool like me and black out your avatars for the day! :=
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Wed 18/01/2012 15:44:31
Under SOPA, if I were to upload a music video of, say The Foo Fighters, to YouTube, then not only myself, but YouTube could be held legally responsible. The entirety of YouTube could (and would) be marked as a piracy site, and would be inaccessible.
Actually, from what I read, they can't. What they CAN do is "sue the offending site to REMOVE THE OFFENDING CONTENT". Thus, if the site in question cannot disprove the claim of infringement or will not obey, THEN the site can be taken down as it is clearly in violation of copyright law.
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 12:28:32I find it quite hard to believe you truly understand the patriot act. You are basically comparing the written works of a deranged, although ingenius, German / Austrian military and political leader to a law passed in the United States. I think the difference in both scope and purpose here is quite noticeable.
Yes, the difference is quite noticeable: This is NOT 1933... But besides that -with stuff like internet- is basically the same: The government uses a group who is already stereotyped as "the enemy" and....
By the way: Do you have any idea what Guantanamo is or what happens there?
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 12:28:32All I know of the Patriot act is what Wikipedia tells me.
What the?????? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME????????????????????????????????
Please, tell me you are joking...
I agree with ProgzMax.
I believe that might be one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
Well heres a real world example of what SOPA will bring. MegaUplaod Song
http://www.geek.com/articles/news/universal-illegitimately-yanks-megaupload-song-from-youtube-20111212/
http://gizmodo.com/5868298/megaupload-mega-sues-universal-over-mega-song-censorship
So imagine you finally release that way cool science fiction game you've been working on for the past ten years (Snake are you listening) and by some miracle it goes viral. Some posts a review somewhere and says "it's the best Sci-fi game since SpaceQuest" -- Vivendi's (or whoever) bot rats you out and shazam your website, AGS website, and any others they can think of disappear into the bit bucket. I wouldn't matter that your game didn't have anything to do with spaceships, spacemen, space or janitors. To get your website back you would have to hire a lawyer and file a lawsuit to get your site back.
@Wham: You are wrong , they don't have to file a lawsuit to have a website taken down. And in the US the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. Under current law sites, such as youtube, aren't liable for user posted content provided that they have a mechanism in place to remove copyright infringing content when informed by the rights holder(s). Rights holders can file lawsuits against anyone who otherwise violates their copyrights.
What you describe is what happens under current law.
@Rick's @WHAM: Precisely. Under SOPA a website may become blacklisted just simply by receiving a report that copyrighted material exists on the site. It would be the site owner's responsibility to take the issue to court if they wanted to ever see their site again. SOPA is intentionally and maliciously worded so generically that there is no need for authentication or verification of these piracy reports before a site can become blacklisted. Under SOPA it is solely the webmaster's responsibility to fight against and defend his website from these attacks.
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 13:12:24To me the SOPA response seems like people crying out "all guns should be banned because they can harm people", while ignoring any positive effects that might also be available (in case of guns: "You come into my house through the window in the middle of the night, I want to be able to defend myself until the police arrive!")
Oh my, please wake up, buddy. You've got it entirely backwards.
To quote:
As Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian explained, PIPA and SOPA are “the equivalent of being angry and trying to take action against Ford just because a Mustang was used in a bank robbery.â€The SOPA response is precisely not what you think, it's NOT painting everything with a broad brush, it's pointing out that that's exactly the bad thing about what
SOPA tries to do.
We'll have to wait and see what the SOPA and PIPA finally do when they are passed into law in the US. Perhaps I am wrong and what I see as overreaction was justified after all, but I still don't believe that we'll be seeing the "end of the internet" just because of SOPA and PIPA.
Call me an overtly positive thinker, but I want to believe these laws will be used to their greatest extent to damage the true pirate networks and will bring us closer to an internet where copyright laws are obeyed more closely, without going overboard with this. We also need to keep in mind how much these websites are generating traffic = ad & other revenue = tax income. Should the SOPA be misused and internet brought down, the legislators will eventually have to realize that the laws need to be fine-tuned and fixed.
Never mind.
More news here:
http://www.groklaw.net
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120118113455360
Can I ask something out of my ignorance?
Do journalists and the press have special rights on the US?
Because I believe such laws (SOPA(means soup in Portuguese) and PIPA (means barrel to store wine)) can relate to it.
Let me explain:
In Portugal,
A journal can reproduce contents that are copyrighted, they cannot reproduce the full 100 pages of a book but can review it, debate on it, have experts talk about it, and ultimately have a profit from the piece(s) printed about that same book. If the article(s) are good enough you sometimes feel that you know the content of the book and eventually end up not buying it!
Now, they are making a profit from contents, names and work that are all copyrighted, isn't it?
What if a law came and said that the articles are piracy matters? The journalist that made a article revealing the end and the mysteries of a Dan Brown book was considered a copyright pirate!
I know that a journalist should hold on to reveal the core of such material, but what if he doesn't? Is he a pirate?
What are the laws regarding News sites? Are they the same? When you include a video from movie A, that video should be allowed by the producers, but what about if the movie is somehow polemic? Like, say, The Brown Bunny and that porn-scene, I'm sure that if it sells, they would risk it (didn't they?).
I think those laws (soup and wine) can't cover every aspects of internet publishing. It will fail, in my opinion because sites will adapt faster than they can act.
Quote from: WHAM on Wed 18/01/2012 17:58:09Call me an overtly positive thinker, but I want to believe these laws will be used to their greatest extent to damage the true pirate networks and will bring us closer to an internet where copyright laws are obeyed more closely, without going overboard with this.
You mean just like the DMCA, who wasn't abused at all? Oh, wait.
Seriously. ::)
miguel:
In a nutshell, SOPA and PIPA are about taking down entire sites until the site owner can prove in court that their site doesn't contain any infringing material and not even a single link to a site that does. It's ineffective and crippling.
Not sure I see the relation to what you described.
Miguel, what you describe is called "Fair Use" and it's not limited by institution or profession - it covers everyone. Soup&Wine would, for all practical purposes, eliminate it. "Fair Use", as it exists in the US, is fairly subjective (like porn -- you know it when you see it). What is and is not fair use is often decided in the courts. Soup&Wine doesn't need to go through the court system so people will be silenced with little recourse.
I believe the UK has something similar called "Fair Dealing".
Just in case somebody desperately needs to use Wikipedia just press esc straight after the text appears.
I am probably rather ignorant in the SOPA ordeal but from my understanding is that it is censoring what Americans can and cannot view on the internet. Also with the National Defense Authorization Act, the outlook here is getting to be quite scary. Regardless if the congressmen want these laws for good reasons. There is no telling how the government will interpret them years from now.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Wed 18/01/2012 15:17:40
No. Just no. Coupled with the National Defense Authorization Act, America is now designated a 'battlefield' and American citizens may now officially (NB: Obama seized the power to assassinate American citizens previously with an Executive Order which he used to kill Anwar Al-Awlaki and his teenage son) be arrested and indefinitely detained outside of American soil on the mere accusation of terrorist involvement without a writ of habeas corpus or a trial. This completely defies the 6th and 12th Amendments of the Constitution.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Wed 18/01/2012 16:56:52
I agree with ProgzMax.
I believe that might be one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
Indeed.
The erosion of civil liberties in the US is terrifying stuff. The executive asserts (in some cases is pressed by the legislative to assert) the unchecked power to arbitrarily wiretap, censor, imprison and kill, merely by declaring individuals terrorists, enemy combatants or copyright infringers. Most Americans still have their civil liberties, but the government can suspend them at any moment. It's hard not to recognize the outline of a police state in these provisions. (That's probably not the
intent of most of the people driving the development - I think few politicians are actually malevolently set on destroying freedom - but that's what they're setting up the foundations for.)
SOPA and PIPA are only a small part of this bigger picture, and I wish we'd seen this level of protest against the latest National Defense Authorization Act, but I guess Google and all the other Silicon Valley companies didn't see that as a direct threat to their business.
This made me chuckle:
(╯°□°）╯︵ ∀ԀOS
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 18/01/2012 21:05:34
(That's probably not the intent of most of the people driving the development - I think few politicians are actually malevolently set on destroying freedom - but that's what they're setting up the foundations for.)
I do think that most politicians have good intentions. But that's not enough. After all, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Just because they mean well doesn't mean they act well.
Khris and RickJ, thanks for the explanation, I would not believe this was so serious.
You see, in my country, laws are never well made so that lawyers can bend and find work around ways to ignore them or use them depending on the side they are defending.
I mean, published contents that are copyright owned is what the internet is all about, imagine the www containing only official brand sites or government sites...it would be like a supermarket where you can't bargain!
I recently played this browser game called The Curfew, in the game the gov controls the internet (and everything else!) but there's this hackers that place virtual tags that you can access through your mobile camera thus allowing you to get underground content, in other words, black market!
I guess that with every over controlled society a underground equivalent rises...
Quote from: Radiant on Wed 18/01/2012 23:00:11
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 18/01/2012 21:05:34
(That's probably not the intent of most of the people driving the development - I think few politicians are actually malevolently set on destroying freedom - but that's what they're setting up the foundations for.)
I do think that most politicians have good intentions. But that's not enough. After all, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Just because they mean well doesn't mean they act well.
I don't think they concerned about it or ever give it much thought!
Quote from: Miguel
I guess that with every over controlled society a underground equivalent rises...
I call it the Free market ;)
Yes, and I'll start a movement right now, challenging all adventure game makers to go underground, use secret codes and fake names, like I can be Miguel and not miguel and sell onions!
Not paying VAT will set you free!
PS: somebody is calling my phone as I write...foreign number...a knock on my door...I got to go!
Quote from: RickJ on Wed 18/01/2012 23:42:02
Quote from: Miguel
I guess that with every over controlled society a underground equivalent rises...
I call it the Free market ;)
I call that Utopia... well, Dystopia... A REAL free market could never exist (at least, I hope not)
Here is a good explanation of what's in the bills by the EFF:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/how-pipa-and-sopa-violate-white-house-principles-supporting-free-speech
Speaking of SOPA, this makes my brain hurt-
https://twitter.com/#!/herpderpedia (https://twitter.com/#!/herpderpedia)
It seems that a very few congressmen or sponsors/supporters of SOPA and PIPA are abandoning it... http://mashable.com/2012/01/18/pipa-sopa-abandon-bill/
In the mean time, if I may concentrate on a facebook post:
Quoteubio communicated his withdrawal via a Facebook post, titled “A Better Way to Fight the Online Theft of American Ideas and Jobs,†in which he argues Congress should avoid rushing to pass the bill that could have unintended consequences.
It does seem that the Internet for the guy has boundaries, and a very specific place it exists: AMERICA! YAY!... Who gives a shit about the rest of the world, right? :(
Quote from: Nikolas on Thu 19/01/2012 07:52:28
It seems that a very few congressmen or sponsors/supporters of SOPA and PIPA are abandoning it... http://mashable.com/2012/01/18/pipa-sopa-abandon-bill/
Well, as Progz suggested, they may either be very disconnected (and thus unaware of the big internet strike) or in the pocket of the big media companies. So that's not really surprising.
I just want to sincerely thank Snarky, who has been at odds with me in the past for my concerns about police state issues in America. It is good to see awareness rising, and that can only mean good things.
Look. Many retired colonels (decorated Lt. Col Anthony Shaffer one of the most vocal) and government officials have actually decried the NDAA as a 'quasi-martial law', and when you really think about what it does, it is. Not only does it define America as a battlefield but it designates ALL Americans as potential terrorist suspects subject to the discretion of the Executive. It legislates the military to act as federal police in direct defiance of posse comitatus, but so many Americans just don't want to believe their country can have people in high levels of government working against them that they walk around in this dissociative haze, parroting only what they see on Fox News.
I see precisely the same thing happening with SOPA, though fortunately for us there is an entire GENERATION of internet users now and they don't want to see their outlet of free speech and expression chopped up, processed, and turned into a set of virtual military checkpoints where you have to consider every word you write carefully to avoid offending some business or official with the wealth or connections to have your internet presence literally revoked.
I just want to add that I don't believe in any apocalypse 2012 scenarios; what I believe in are people, and I know that if enough of us speak up unafraid, make videos, join protests on street corners, print out awareness pamphlets about SOPA and other issues we feel attack our civil liberties, we WILL win.
It's not a matter of optimism, of that I have no doubt, because there are far more of us than there are legislators, and more than that, laws still require them to be re-elected by vote; a vote those pro-SOPA senators won't be getting from any politically aware voter.
I actually expect quite a shake up in the house and senate in the next election cycle, which can only mean good things. Afterall, we're talking about a congress that has a record-low approval rating of 8%!
Without SOPA or PIPA, Megaupload is down, 7 arrested, $50 M and 18 domains confiscated...
This sums it up (http://imgur.com/a/M5a2O) pretty well.
And the fact that MegaUpload has been brought down, pending conviction (presumably, it will be back up if the charges are overturned), just goes to prove how very much we do not need SOPA/PIPA. The laws that are already in place are sufficient. We don't need more law, we need more enforcement.
And then there is this bit from Iran:
https://plus.google.com/114124708527697564422/posts/gB8VnoQHy6Y#114124708527697564422/posts/gB8VnoQHy6Y
Quote from: Nikolas on Thu 19/01/2012 07:52:28It seems that a very few congressmen or sponsors/supporters of SOPA and PIPA are abandoning it... http://mashable.com/2012/01/18/pipa-sopa-abandon-bill/
The Washington Post lists several more (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/google-says-7-million-signed-petition-against-anti-piracy-bills/2012/01/19/gIQAJ2MiBQ_story.html) "co-sponsors" who say that they won't support this as written. 7 million (unverified) signatures may only be constituted by a small portion of the American population, but I would hope that in a "democracy" (or "democratic republic") that it would be at least enough to make these politicians reconsider. If this does go through, I am convinced that it will be a direct result of the media corporations buying out the legislators. :-\
Apparently Anonymous took down the DOJ and a number of other websites in retaliation. I think a "Boycott The Movies" may be more effective. Imagine if movie theaters went empty for 1 or 2 weekends?
Yes, a full on Universal boycott would definitely help if you'd ask me. I've been propagating that since yesterday. ;)
I haven't gone to the movies in something like 6 years because prices have become outrageous so that will be easy for me to boycott. :)
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 19/01/2012 18:15:50
I just want to sincerely thank Snarky, who has been at odds with me in the past for my concerns about police state issues in America. It is good to see awareness rising, and that can only mean good things.
Thanks ProgZ. I think this is a topic where we agree on a number of important issues, while still disagreeing about some of the fundamental principles involved, details of the analysis, and the conclusions we draw.
I've always been concerned with civil liberties and civil rights, and particularly with the dangers of unaccountable power. The hollowing-out of established protections in the US has been worrying me since the PATRIOT Act. I nevertheless differ from the libertarian position in that I don't see many other aspects of government regulation and exercise of power (including much economic policy) as illegitimate, nor do I see a danger to liberty from supranational bodies and treaties.
Like I said, I think few if any politicians and other drivers behind these concerning developments are deliberately out to create a US police state. I think they just see the powers and secrecy as being useful to fight terrorists, criminals and other undesirables (whose civil rights they probably
do to a large extent discount), and overlook or don't believe in the long-term negative effects and dangers to freedom in general. When it comes to censorship and copyright, I mostly blame lobbying from special interests.
Quote
I've always been concerned with civil liberties and civil rights, and particularly with the dangers of unaccountable power. The hollowing-out of established protections in the US has been worrying me since the PATRIOT Act. I nevertheless differ from the libertarian position in that I don't see many other aspects of government regulation and exercise of power (including much economic policy) as illegitimate, nor do I see a danger to liberty from supranational bodies and treaties.
Snarky, I think many people have this same point of view and I have always wondered how they can trust government on somethings but not others. Unaccountable power is always a danger to liberty, IMHO.
SOPA is "dead" (http://mashable.com/2012/01/20/sopa-is-dead-smith-pulls-bill/), or so we're asked to believe.
Just when I was about to start organizing a Houston-based boycott of theaters for a week. Dang. Maybe I'll do it anyway. :D
Quote from: RickJ on Fri 20/01/2012 18:53:49
Snarky, I think many people have this same point of view and I have always wondered how they can trust government on somethings but not others. Unaccountable power is always a danger to liberty, IMHO.
I have always wondered how people that distrust the government (regardless of whether this distrust is justified) will
still trust the kind of corporation that will stoop to any low as long as it makes a profit.
(of course, not all corporations are like that, but some of them are infamous for this)
Corporations are not necessarily anymore trustworthy than governments but they are more accountable criminally, civilly, and mostly in the marketplace.
If a corporation screws you over you can easily refuse to future business with them, if they have been negligent or cause damage they can be sued, and if they commit fraud or other crimes there officers and employees can go to jail.
Try refusing to do business with your government and see who goes to jail. You can't sue your government except when the government has given permission to do so in their prescribed time and manner.
The proper role of government is to enforce the rules. But when they break the rules who will enforce the rules? How many policemen do you think ever give themselves a citation for having a burnt-out tail light or inadvertently going 5 mph over the speed limit? In the words of Cesar "Who will guard the guards?". ;D
Quote from: RickJ on Fri 20/01/2012 18:53:49
Snarky, I think many people have this same point of view and I have always wondered how they can trust government on somethings but not others. Unaccountable power is always a danger to liberty, IMHO.
The point isn't that I trust the government more on some things, it's that I think certain exercises of government power (some of them decried by libertarians) are legitimate and benign. There should always be accountability.
And I would argue that a democratic government in a state with civil rights is often in practice more accountable than a corporation. For example, the government is divided into different branches, which are (when the system works) accountable to each other.
It's an inescapable fact that some people have power over others: the strong over the weak. Government is one expression of this fact, but not by far the only one (parents over their children, bosses over their workers, the rich over the poor, the armed over the unarmed, the smart over the stupid, the many over the few). The primary goal of the liberal project over the last several hundred years has been to equalize, regulate and balance these powers against each other (e.g. through the idea of divided government) in order to prevent or at least reduce abuses, which is one way to define liberty.
Quote from: RickJ on Fri 20/01/2012 20:35:32
In the words of Cesar "Who will guard the guards?". ;D
That's actually the poet Juvenal.
Quote from: RickJ on Fri 20/01/2012 20:35:32
If a corporation screws you over you can easily refuse to future business with them, if they have been negligent or cause damage they can be sued, and if they commit fraud or other crimes there officers and employees can go to jail.
That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.
Quote
That's actually the poet Juvenal.
I stand corrected. ;D Thanks.
Quote
The point isn't that I trust the government more on some things, it's that I think certain exercises of government power (some of them decried by libertarians) are legitimate and benign. There should always be accountability.
But governments are hardly ever accountable and almost always oppressive. case in point:
http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_c17a5b7e-3aea-11e1-bcf0-001871e3ce6c.html
[edit]
Quote
That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.
I don't agree ...
Consumer: http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/boycotts/successfulboycotts.aspx
Civil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants
Criminal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff
Quote from: RickJ on Fri 20/01/2012 22:48:31
But governments are hardly ever accountable and almost always oppressive. case in point:
I think we all agree that accountability is good. Just as companies are accountable in court so are elected governments accountable to the voters (who can choose not to re-elect them), at least in theory. Unfortunately in both cases, this doesn't always work out in practice.
Given the Trias Politica, to hold anybody accountable a country would need a strong legislative and judicial branch of its government, at least - the first to set standards for entities to be accountable
to, and the second to carry it out. These branches need sufficient power to perform their duties, or the whole accountability breaks down.
Quote
Quote
That is definitely true for small companies, but it doesn't work so well for big ones with a multimillion dollar legal department.
I don't agree ...
Consumer: http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/boycotts/successfulboycotts.aspx
Civil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants
Criminal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Madoff
While that's good to hear, it still comes down to two or three successes
per year, and that's simply not a good track record.