Other than being blindingly wrong about patents being a good thing, the rest was pretty solid. A little wordy but solid.Velocirapture07 said:Thank you for saying this. A very intelligent reply to a very idiotic group of people.Korolev said:Show me an open source, copy-right free group that can create chips that can rival what Intel produces. Show me a developed economy that doesn't protect inventors. Show me advanced technology built by people who don't want a cent in return. Show me new anti-retroviral drugs that are tested and researched for over 20 years, produced by teens in their mom's basement.
A lot of these anonymous people are just teens in their mom or dad's basement, who write little bits of code or do indie games and thus, they have the arrogant assumption that just because they can write code for free (and not very good code at that), all code should be free all the time.
But that way of thinking is shallow and stupid. Advanced biological research requires millions if not BILLIONS of dollars. I would know - I do biological research. I have a degree in Biotech, which means that I also understand how the biotech industry operates (they make you take a few business courses and do a few PDPs, that's Product Development Proposals by the way). Simply put, you cannot have an "Open source" biotech industry. The amount and quality of reagents that we require is enormous. The costs associated with our research is similarly ENORMOUS. You cannot do PCR reactions in your mom's basement (well, not clean, reliable PCR reactions). You cannot clone plasmids or do electroporation in your dad's attic. It requires LABS, it requires MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN EQUIPMENT.
SOMEONE MUST FOOT THE BILL! SOMEONE MUST PAY FOR THAT! And that is WHY we need investors, who would LIKE to see a RETURN ON THEIR INVESTMENT! Got that genius! That is WHY we need PATENTS and WHY WE NEED COPYRIGHT!
The only alternative is to let the government fund every single medical or biological project. The only alternative to the patent/copyright system, is to let the government fund everything with your tax dollars. Would you like that? I didn't think so.
Your emote is what makes what you said so delicious.SODAssault said:Look how cool I am for saying I'm not impressed! I am the human incarnation of unflappable nonchalance! Damn the consequences, I'm going to take a brave stance against these cyber terrorists by talking shit about them on a site that I know their members don't often visit, because I am just that unafraid!
Well, as others have said before, Anonymous gets shit done, so we may have something here.Kraiiit said:Hey, lesser of two evils. I don't exactly support the internet group, but the RIAA are greedy and obnoxious bullies, using lawsuits and scare tactics, while taking more income than the artists usually get. I know whose side I'm on here.
Because they're anarchists or something.Talvrae said:I had thought that Annonymous was an organisation against the church of Scientology since when does they attack things about copyrights?
This.Xzi said:Well I don't particularly support what they're fighting for, but to their credit, at least Anonymous gets shit done. How many other protest groups can say the same?
And this.Ldude893 said:It's official.
Anonymous has declared war on America.
I had to quote you to say "great post."Therumancer said:_tinned_magpie_ said:Why do I get the feeling that Anonymous are only going to make things worse? I mean, declaring war on Gene Simmons was just hilarious, but I don't think the Government will react well if they keep it up. If we act like children, they're going to keep on treating us like children, including taking our toys away. Clearly we're not mature enough to use them.
I admit, I've pirated songs. I don't like the idea of pirating films, and usually I've got no problem with buying my music, but occasionally there's something you can't find anywhere else. So I've no real problem on the crackdown on piracy, it's the restrictions of Fair Use that bother me. They're coming down far too hard on anything that even vaguely resembles copyright infringement, and it ends up upsetting a lot of people. Things like tribute videos or putting a song in the background of your own work isn't hurting anyone, or so I think. My university can't even use pictures in lecture slides any more, or else they'll get fined.
I don't know much about copyright law but I think the system needs a re-think, because right now it isn't going too well. We've taken baby steps in terms of Creative Commons, but we need compromise, because it isn't ever going to go away completely. At least, that's my opinion.
Actually Anonymous has the right idea, you have to be willing to take on the goverment to get anything done as far as society is concerned. If you just figure "oh well, we/I will annoy the goverment I should give up or they will crush me" then your basicaly conceding to tyranny. Our right to keep and bear arms is specifically intended so we can go after politicians and the like with firearms if they need was to arise.
Anonymous is simply doing things differantly, fighting for information issues through information networks.
Let me be blunt about something though, I support free speech heavily, and I think the game and music industries are a bunch of crooks who do not operate within the American spirit of capitolism. The game industry in paticular acts like a cartel.
On the other hand Anonymous attacking the copyrights office seems to be going a little too far, largely because I *DO* support the right to patent actual products and ideas. I understand that the copyrights are a big part of this entire battle, but I'd think groups like the FCC and paticular politicians and industry leaders would be better targets. Of course then again I'm viewing this from outside, not fighting the war, and as I've said before, this kind of civil law issue is hardly my specialty.
I don't support piracy, but at the same time I don't support the industry against it. As odd as that sounds, it's a simple matter of me feeling that both sides are crooks, and in the final equasion neither have the best interests of me, the gamer, at heart. Stealing games so the people making them can't make money doesn't encourage their development. At the same time running the industry to constantly gouge the consumer, and engaging in illegal and immoral business practices to do so hurts the consumers.
In the end I tend to feel that the conflict between the industry and pirates is a symbiotic one where they both cause each other to exist as problems. The gaming industry by being greedy, abusing customers (hi Mr. Kotick), and engaging in a lot of it's current practices (DRM, DLC Gouging, etc...) causes pirates to flourish, it's hard to feel guilty when your robbing a bunch of arrogant crooks. By the same token the industry claims that it needs to act like it does because of the piracy and uses the piracy as a "catch all" excuse to justify it's behavior.... and let's be honest, whie it was smaller to begin with the war between pirates and the gaming industry has always been there to some extent. It's simply got bigger as the market has grown. There was all kinds of odd stuff going on in this regard back in the days of the "Commodore 64" and "Apple 2", and video games were never exactly cheap. Even back with the "Atari 2600" I remember as a little kid understanding how crazy the price of a game like "Yar's Revenge" was.
No actually, it is still the same.usucdik said:But it would be the first time for this case. You just don't understand the intentions.Tdc2182 said:It wouldn't be the first time society completely missed the point of something.usucdik said:So do you mean to imply that the holiday based on the guy is because the people are pro-theocracy?
If by scary, you mean that it's scary that no one wants to fight the power when need be because of the loss of anonymity and thus we are controlled by the powers we put in place for fear of punishment. Yes.Finch58 said:It is somewhat scary as to how much people can achieve under the anonymous discuise.
Guy Fawkes has been thought to represent Anarchy by people who take on the label. They believe that he tried to create chaos and destroy the Parliament, When in reality he was only trying to put the Catholic Church back into power, a much less noble Commision.usucdik said:So basically you are quoting something that had the same wrong impression that you did. Great job making that point.Tdc2182 said:No actually, it is still the same.
I believe this article mentions Anonymous, I could be wrong. But it does explain it.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18606_8-historic-symbols-that-mean-opposite-what-you-think.html
Very first one, number 8.
Enjoy.
QFT.Xzi said:Well I don't particularly support what they're fighting for, but to their credit, at least Anonymous gets shit done. How many other protest groups can say the same?