2015? Really? Don't make me laugh.

You're completely clueless, aren't you? As long as you've been around here, you honestly don't know what those dates mean? And what they don't?

Who do we root for? Prenda, FBI, or PirateBay.

A strange game, Dr. Falken.
The only winning move is not to play.
.
.
How about a nice game of chess?

Many moons ago, I got tired of what was on the radio, and I built a pirate FM station. It had a studio supplied with over 50 volunteer DJs, but most of all it had the transmitter up in the mountains, with a UHF uplink system, to allow for very broad coverage of our city. I made the uplink transmitter form a 1985 Motorola cell phone, the old brick type. It was suitably modified to put out wideband FM audio. You might be able to read about it by Googling "Radio Limbo Tucson".

You're my hero.

Alice posts a video using music that Bob owns the copyright to. Carol posts a video that uses music Bob falsely claims to also hold the copyright for. Unfortunately Bob's false claim against Carol doesn't change the fact that he actually does have a legitimate legal claim against Alice's video. So kicking him off the system means he's going to issue a takedown against Alice. The whole point of bringing him into the system was to give him an incentive to leave Alice alone.

The problem here isn't Bob and Alice -- that part of the scenario is working fine. The problem is Bob and Carol. There's no incentive for Bob not to make false claims against Carol. That's the bit that has to be fixed.

You're talking to grown adults.

Like hell. I'm talking to KiA and if there are any "grown adults" there, you're going to have to prove it.

We are the same free minded geeks who have been around since Internet day 1

No, you're not. You weren't born on the Internet's "day one". I was there on the other hand, and the people I knew back then would have had pieces of Gamergaters/MRAs/KiAs/and /pol in their crap. You guys aren't fit to name the people who were there at the Internet's day one.

It's getting tiresome to have the open, free, principled sites and communications networks we built being labeled as "septic tanks" by the likes of yourself

Then keep them from becoming septic tanks. As I said, "learn how to behave".

There are 2 billion people online, we built this network for them

You didn't build shit.

You people are the creationists of the internet, and you are not taking us back to the stone age.

You've got a fair amount of evolving to do before you make it to the Stone Age.

What, did Madden finally kick the bucket?

He retired in 2009. Chris Collinsworth, who is competent, replaced him.

biased

Or, you know, they could just learn how to behave a little bit. If you want Reddit to be a KiA septic tank, don't cry when someone decides to have you pumped out just because it's stinking up the neighborhood.

Well, it may interest you to know that courts judging "emotional distress" is not some new Internet fad. In the year 1348 an innkeeper brought suit against a man who had been banging on his tavern door demanding wine. When the innkeeper stuck his head out the doorway to tell the man to stop, the man buried the hatchet he was carrying into the door by the innkeeper's head. The defendant argued that since there was no physical harm inflicted no assault had taken place, but the judged ruled against him [ de S et Ux. v. W de S (1348)]. Ever since then non-physical, non-financial harm has been considered both an essential element of a number of of crimes, a potential aggravating factor in others, and an element weighed in establishing civil damages.

This does *not*, however, mean that hurt feelings in themselves constitute a crime. It's a difficult and sometimes ambiguous area of the law, but the law doesn't have the luxury of addressing easy and clear-cut cases only.

As to why a new law is need now, when the infliction of emotional distress has been something the law has been working on for 667 years, I'd say that the power of technology to uncouple interactions from space and time has to be addressed. Hundreds of years ago if someone was obnoxious to you at your favorite coffeehouse, you could go at a different time or choose a different coffeehouse. Now someone intent on spoiling your interactions with other people doesn't have to coordinate physical location and schedule with you to be a persistent, practically inescapable nuisance.

Does this mean every interaction that hurts your feelings on the Internet is a crime? No, no more than everything that happens in your physical presence you take offense at is a crime.

Ingress does have moderation controls. Every single submitted portal has to be approved by Niantic. It often takes 9-12 months before new portals are approved/denied. Basically, Niantic staff approved these portals.

Sorry? We're talking about Debian Jessie here.

Indeed. The whole point of the game is to get gamers outside and walking and visiting interesting and significant places. (One game slogan is "it's time to move".)

The problem isn't that the location is in the game. The problem is that some players act like complete arses, ruining those locations for everyone else. In retrospect, this is an obvious point.

Kind of like how the Prime Directive always makes the best course of action perfectly clear.

Of course, if you didn't keep it in a cage, then maybe it wouldn't lash out against its handlers.

Ever listen to football commentary or basketball? Its all color commentary or idiotic observations like "team X won because they scored more points"... no shit, fucktards.

You must have lousy sports coverage in your town, or maybe you just haven't listened to a game in a long time. You get continual analytics in most cases, and statistics that actually mean something. Occasionally, you'll get a fossil like Hawk Harrelson who's just a curmudgeon but even in that case, they teamed him with Steve Stone, who can break down pitch location, OBP, WAR numbers, BABIP, FIP and xFIP.

At least in this town, it's the same for basketball and football, though there haven't been as many advanced statistics developed for those sports. Maybe it's just because Bill James got the ball rolling (sorry) sooner for baseball. But all the announcers are pros and not a single one will give you the kind of obvious nonsense you describe.

Even the hockey coverage in town, whether you're listening to John Weideman and Troy Murry on the radio or Eddie Olczyk on TV, these are guys who will drop numbers on you and give you insights you probably wouldn't have noticed even if you were sitting behind the glass.

Naw man, there hasn't been a "Team X won because they scored more points" in a long while.

We don't need analytics

But people who pay attention to e-Sports and aren't dumb fucks like you might have an interest in analytics. Some people who are interested in video games care about more than whether the female announcer is showing cleavage. One minute you talk about how e-Sports announcers are so great because they give you the "micro" in Starcraft, and then you say you don't need analytics. Do you know what anaylytics are? And did I mention that you're a dumb fuck?

Some of those apps are probably really profitable. If you're somebody who likes to listen to lectures and you're not one of the 0.00001% of nerds who use xposed, to turn your screen off while YouTube plays costs $120/yr for a subscription (the feature is non-technically tied to Google Play Music).

There might some apps that have in-app purchase fees higher than $10/mo to keep going, but I haven't run across them. I realize you can't give everything away forever, but Google's got a lock on that market and boy do they monetize it.