Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: It doesn't even matter (Score 1) 301 301

I'd be surprised if even one person had ever been prosecuted for ripping a CD for personal use. Commercial use/bootlegging/counterfeiting - of course. But I have never even heard or read of anyone suffering any penalty for ripping a CD for themselves. How would it be detected? Who would care? It's a civil matter so there is no involvement of the police or the state. How would the rights holder(s) ever detect the event of a copy being made, or be able to prove the provenance or a copy "discovered"?

In short it's a nice bit of make work for the lawyers and is of zero concern to everyone else.

btw I used to work at a regional police HQ and the gym CD player ran on ripped CDs and home burned compilations ha ha ha. Nobody gives a fuck - not the politicians, not the police, not the magistrates, not the state, not the performers - only the music industry lawyers.

But if anyone can cite even one verifiable instance of a person in England or Wales being sued, successfully or otherwise, for ripping an audio CD for personal use please, please, please post a link.

Comment: Re:UK ISPs cause DoS (Score 1) 160 160

Still no facts.

But more angry outbursts.

You resort again and again to personal abuse. You seem to be a very immoderate person, evidently prone to an alarming lack of self control and emotional incontinence.

Your only resolve appears to be in avoiding trying to support your plainly ridiculous assertion with actual evidence.

If you have any useful facts or evidence to support your exciting conspiracy theory do please publish it.



Comment: Re:UK ISPs cause DoS (Score 1) 160 160

That's a very long excuse.

Perhaps if you had any facts or evidence to hand you might not have needed the evasions and colourful insults?

As things stand you've made a ridiculous allegation of conspiracy by ISP and that wicked government, despite there patently not being one as some of the biggest ISPs don't clearly aren't in on the big secret.

When asked to provide any facts or evidence you become evasive and overwrought while hurling allegations of mental immaturity and so on.

So far you're neither convincing nor credible.

You are indeed a bog standard leftist, merely recycling the same old boiler plate imbecilities in the same old ways.

Remember: four legs good, two legs better!

Comment: Re:UK ISPs cause DoS (Score 1) 160 160

Is that rant supposed to a substitute for some facts to support your exciting conspiracy theory?

It looks a lot like a noisy diversion.

I hit the nail right on the head in spotting you for a standard issue, unthinking, leftist trotting out the usual self pitying, drama queen conspiracy crap.

Facts please. Or you're just another conspiracy theory nutjob.

Comment: Re:UK ISPs cause DoS (Score 1) 160 160

"I'd wager a deal was done between music industry, government and ISPs - it seems that the government has promised not to enforce net neutrality on ISPs so that they can filter, throttle, and block at will as long as ISPs agree to bow down to the whims ......"

boiler plate paranoid drivel straight out of "Leftist Whining for Beginners", totally speculative and with not one piece of supporting data.

I'm on TalkTalk, one of the biggest ISPs in UK. Apparently they weren't in on this soopa sikrit big conspiracee because I can access and even without needing a proxy.

Results in Full:

Leftist Bed-Wetting Theory 0 - 1 Reality

Comment: Re:More inconvienient than the average filter. (Score -1, Troll) 115 115

"You can do it online, but it's much more satisfying calling them up and asking them to turn on porn on your mobile phone contract. Added points if you put on a creepy voice when doing so."

I'd not looked at it quite like this before and thank you for your insight. I realise how timid I'd been up until now :-). Luckily I already have the creepy voice so this actually should be super easy. Since 3G access improved around here I will even be able to make the call from within the shrubbery at the local park.

On the other hand I might join the pseudo-libertarians and whimpering bedwetters. I just want to know how it feels to actually propose and apparently believe an argument that goes:

A: "Waaah! I am being censored and oppressed! Wahh!"

B: "Don't be upset, you're not being oppressed. You can change it whenever you like. Look, it's the switch right here, clearly marked and rght in front of you."

A: "Waaah! I am being censored and oppressed! Wahh!"

B:"Are you OK? Is there someone who looks after you? Perhaps Mummy or Daddy will flick that big nasty switch for you."

A: "Waaah! I am being censored and oppressed! Wahh!"

A: "And I want I ice cream! Waah!"

B:"How many ice creams am I holding up Winston?"

A:"I like strawberry flavour best".

Comment: Re:More inconvienient than the average filter. (Score 0) 115 115

"Nothing about the definition of censorship requires that it be coercive or non-optional. For instance, there is something called "self-censorship"

That is a very desperate rationalisation of a very disingenuous and transparently stupid position.

Censorship by govt or media outlets or other authorities is never optional. Uncle Joe Stalin or Adolf or Pol Pot or King Saud never did ask if you'd prefer it on or off.

I've lived in countries where there is real censorship and harsh penalties for breaking it (or even just trying to). Trying to equate that, on a weak semantic excuse, with ISPs being required to give account holders the *option* to filter XXX/p2p is not only wrong headed but displays incredible conceit and ignorance.

There are real issues with press freedom here in UK, ranging from concentration of media in a few hands to increasing government interference with actual journalists and news organisations. These are very serious dangers. So what do the hipster activists scream about? Mum and Dad might filter their porn so the house doesn't shake to bits from their idiot bearded teenager's one handed nocturnal manipulations. Well done hipsters, you dumb, self absorbed cunts.

Comment: Re:More inconvienient than the average filter. (Score 0) 115 115

"I suggest blocking religious websites by default, and any website which criticizes a certain political party. Would there be outrage then? You bet."

But this isn't happening. You just invented it. If you want to have a debate you need to examine the facts and then proceed, not invent some stuff and then pretend the invented stuff is real and bad. This is why I mentioned *faux* outrage and *disingenuous* posturing. I should have added infantile foot stamping and bed wetting.

"...censorship should not be the default."

It isn't. Censorship is coercive and non-optional. An ISP's *** OPTIONAL *** filter which is *** ENTIRELY CONTROLLED BY THE ACCOUNT HOLDER *** is not censorship. It's an account option.

On the other hand, all you pseudo-libertarian, unthinking lefties are so fucking inept, stupid and easily led that it probably does seem like and insurmountable obstacle to you. But that's your problem. The rest of us just toggle a switch and are not censored.

Comment: Re:More inconvienient than the average filter. (Score 1) 115 115

No you don't have to call in. I'm in UK and have broadband both on landline and on mobile, each on a different ISP (TalkTalk and giffgaff respectively). Here's how I ensured my services are not filtered:

1) log-in to my account page on ISP's website.

2) Look see if "family safe" filter or whatever it's called is enabled. Make sure it isn't (it wasn't enabled by default on my landline but was on by default on my mobile ISP).

3) err, that's it.

It takes less than a minute for the change to take effect. You don't have to spend money, speak to anyone or offer a reason.

When you get past the faux outrage and disingenuous political posturing of people pretending to be injured or outraged what you actually find is a convenient system that allows anyone who has an ISP account to decide for themselves if their guests/children/employees can access p2p/chatrooms/XXX/gaming etc. I run my services unfiltered. Nobody cares.

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.