SOPA and PIPA might not pass, but something will, and whatever passes in their place will no doubt be worse. We know the intent of these companies, and we know that they will not give up. Still, we give them our money. We give them our money knowing that they will use that money to try and take away certain freedoms that we hold dear.
Imagine any other industry doing that. Telling their customers to their face that they want to censor them, and expecting those customers to keep patronizing them. For some reason, the big media companies don't seem care, though. They openly sponsor these bills, and they don't fear any retribution from the consumer.
Face it, as long as consumers continue to give these companies their heard-earned cash, these companies will continue funneling that hard-earned cash into lawyers, legislators, and laws designed to benefit them and harm us.
Eventually, they are going to get their way.
The Weather Channel, however, robbed me of all of that. They unilaterally overruled me, and decided how my photo would be used. They took my photograph without asking, chopped off my signature, put ads beside it, and to try and stay on the right side of fair use gave me the most obscure credit they could muster.
Talk about a slap in the face.
It’s a letdown, but not one I can do much about.
Let me try to turn a negative into a positive, though. Let this be a teachable moment.
It’s important to remember that, in an age of bills like SOPA, it’s not always the little guy that engages in “piracy”.
According to their own website:
The Weather Channel Companies are owned by a consortium made up of NBC Universal and the private equity firms The Blackstone Group and Bain Capital.
That’s right NBC Universal a company which supports SOPA just nabbed my photograph.
I suppose they’ll be the first to pull the plug on The Weather Channel website. After all, piracy in all its forms, is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong."
Link to Original Source
Miles/points and other gimmicks mean nothing to me.
Oh, but they do.
They mean something to all of us, even those of us without credit cards.
I used to be a small business owner, and I stopped taking "points" credit cards altogether.
Do you know who pays for those points and gives you the cash back?
The merchant. That's right, points cards always cost the merchant a larger percentage in transaction fees, and the credit card companies offer this difference (usually only a fraction of the difference) as THEIR GIFT TO YOU
Swell guys, eh?
Sheeple spending points is like sheeple spending tax "refund" checks. They think it's free money from the heavens above, but it comes about only through their own assfucking.
Points/rewards credit cards are a pretty big factor behind the increasing costs of goods/services. The credit card companies take it from the merchant, take a slice for themselves, and give you whats left.
In turn, the merchants raise their prices to cover the "rewards", and prices go up for everyone, regardless of how they pay. Next time you take you credit card to the store, prices have gone up 20% to cover this atrocity, but you gladly buy it anyway because you get more points on your card. And the cycle continues.
Rewards/points cards are in the top 10 scams of the century.
But hey, enjoy your 49 cents cash back. You earned it.
In order for democracy to work, the populace must be of sufficient intellect to make the best decisions for itself. The masses cannot do this, and this reality is unchangeable.
That which we call "critical" or "abstract" thinking generally requires an IQ of 110 or greater. The average IQ of the U.S. citizen is 98. This means that the majority of Americans have an IQ of less than 100. Those with IQs of less than 100 tend to make decisions based on repetition and consensus rather than critical analysis, and even "smart" people have a difficult time resisting the lure of basing conclusions on "common knowledge".
As such, people can be fairly easily persuaded to vote against their own interests time, and time, and time again.
Democracy as a means of preventing tyranny and corruption is fairly useless, for democracy is 3 geniuses, 20 bright people, and 500 idiots voting on a course of action. The numbers are made up, but you get the gist, and they are probably not far off. When someone with an IQ of 65 has an equal influence on important matters as does a person with an IQ of 140, the Achilles heel of of democracy becomes evident.
A benevolent dictatorship, to whatever extent one can truly exist, would be a far better, more fair, more efficient, more humane form of government than is democracy.
GoDaddy will be fine, because even though Slashdotters know what SOPA is, 90% of people have no clue as to what is going on.
Despite nearly 18 months of seeming outrage over the TSA's backscatter and groping, airline travel was up this holiday season. Bloggers and talking heads were pissed, but Joe and Jane Soccermom remained oblivious. Were it put to a vote tomorrow, the TSA's groping policy would be overwhelmingly approved by American voters.
Similarly, when SOPA or a SOPA-like law is passed, and it will be, Slashdot will blow up with comments, but the legislators who pass it will be re-elected without issue.
3 geniuses, 20 bright people, 500 idiots.
The government will once again act against the interest of the citizens, while 3 people scream, 20 people complain on Slashdot, and 500 people watch Monday Night Football.
Democracy. It doesn't work.
It never did.
It never will.
I don't expect that love to be universal, though. Arguing interfaces is like arguing flavors of ice cream.
I have a Galaxy Tab, and while I love it most of the time, it memory leaks like hell. I use it a great deal, which means that at a minimum, I have to reboot once daily. I can somewhat see that the 512MB of RAM is too tight for any more candy.
It seems pathetic, though, considering that 20 short years ago my PC had 4MB of RAM and ran Windows 3.1 just fine (well, not "fine", but I'm sure you get the point). Now, I've got 128x that, and I can barely run a mobile operating system with a pretty shell.
It does seem wrong on so many levels.
86% of mobile users are watching TV while using a mobile phone, 200+ million (1/3 of all users) access Facebook from a mobile device and 91% of all mobile internet use is “social” related."
The rush to convert every web page over to have direct mobile compatibility is growing, but from an honest perspective do you really think that these "predictions" are actually realistic?"
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
In other other new, bad looking women don't seem to notice the change.
Leave your mother out of this.