Na, it will all be needed to make big domes to protect the cities.
I hear they make computers out of the stuff.
Yep, big linnup of corporate freeloaders trying to get in early in the exploitation of others.
We need to abandon freedom 0 (The freedom to run the program, for any purpose),
The Free software movement should not demand that software be allowed to be used to make society less free. We cant just concern ourselves with software, we are not an island,
We need a non-commercial licence
How can anyone take them seriously when they use proprietary closed source drivers...
They are just a gimmick.
"The hysteria and FUD and the billions of dollars and euros wasted on "climate modeling" is absurd"
Understanding reality is not hysteria, trying to deny it is.
It says I'm frustrated by somebody playing dumb. At least for your sake I hope you are just playing dumb and don't actually believe your own stupid statements
We dont have to agree, its ok for people to have differences of opinion. No big deal.
I dont accept your arguments that they are accessories to copyright infringement (assuming thats a law); From wikipedia
An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:
The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind"), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (Latin for "guilty act").
If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.
IMO It is reasonable to expect the site administrators to know that there is copyright infringing material on their site. But it is not reasonable to expect the site administrators to know if downloading material from a specific torrent would constitute a copyright infringing. Nothing you have said about the words they use or the way they organise their links has any bearing on that.
The uneducated masses just look at the end result, they see a site that makes it easy to get copyright infringing material, and they blame the site. A simplistic analysis and little value. Try digging a bit deeper.
The law should judge people based on their actions, not on their beliefs. TPB adminstrators have gone out of the way to setup the systems so their actions are not contributing to copyright infringment.
If they can setup a system so they can advocate their views without being accessories then i think that is a good form of civil disobedience. Societies cant progress if people blindly do what they are told.
It could be argued their inaction is contibuting to copyright infringment, but ive not heard the argument about that being illegal.
The fact that you resort to personal attacks say more about your values that it does about me, so grow up.
If you cant see both sides of an argument it suggests bias, not wisdom.
Being an advocate of a crime is not the same thing as being an accessory to a crime.
I know its easy to make things black and white, but everyone who has followed it should be able to understand they go out of their way to make it as grey as possible. If it was black and white it would have been delt with long ago.
Get real here. The Pirate Bay explicitly set out to link to copyrighted materials.
The piratebay administrators dont, some people who upload torrents do.
The site behaves the same way a "common carrier" does in tellecommunications, blaming TPB is like blaming ISP's for piracy.
ISP's want you to download content, they dont take any steps to verify the licences of content their customers are trying to download.
Do you have any idea how stupid you sound when you make such statements. You lose all credibility when you act like facilitating crime isn't in and of itself a crime. Google accidentally linking to some files is one thing. TPB exists entirely on the premise of facilitating copyright infringement. Thats different.
Do you have any idea how stupid you sound when you make such statements, you lose all credibility when you act like all filesharing is copyright infringement. Accidental punishing legal sharing is one thing. Media cartels manipulating law enforcement agencies to deliberately target specific file sharing methods. Thats different.
TPB exists entirely on the premise of facilitating file sharing using the bittorrent protocol. It does not have the means to check copyrights, and media cartels have demonstrated they cannot be trusted to provide advise on what is copyrighted. They have no choice but to remove themselves from such decisions, just like google does.
Your implication that correlation implies causation is extremely dangerous to society, it can only lead us to a dark age of inquisitions and witch hunts.
If you void patients then companies will stop sharing their innovations with people
What do people have to do with it ?
Ok, ill bite;
Given that coal causes more harm to society than other forms of electricty generation (it causes more polution per kW), how is divesting coal investments hypecritical.
Go for it. People and businesses will drop open source like a hot rock and that will be the end of OSS as a force in the software industry.
Your post highlights a fundamental difference between us, i think a software community is of primary importance, you are talking about a software industry. They are different things.
But yes i know if im the odd man out, and i cant be a community of one.
it should not be free to use for the purpose of ensalving us.