Knew that. The problem is that there is a corollary - or a replacement - theorem to the Peter Principle at work here: people in social hierarchies rise to the level of their sociopathy. Wouldn't it be priceless if the Peter Principle was coined by a sociopath as a deliberate misdirection?
Sure, but it's so much more fun to blame others and then sue them FTW.
Why did people mod you funny? Do they all know something about you that I don't? I could have written that myself, and I would've been sociopathically dead serious. All human social hierarchies suck, and the reason they suck, the sole reason, is because sociopaths always wind up in charge of them. If we had a prenatal test for sociopathy or a gene therapy cure, I'd be advocating eugenics like there was no tomorrow!
Although... then they just wind up claiming the symptoms have delayed onset or something else ridiculous.
Works for me! I was kidding about the spacesuit, though.
I look forward to the Lucas-style remake of Interstellar next year.
That only works if he doesn't know that he's sitting in a Faraday cage. Otherwise the kid would simply subconsciously - or consciously - fake symptoms just to fulfill the prophesy declared by his parents. He can't know the Faraday cage is there, else you'd never be able to rule out WiFi RF and narrow it to "something [else] environmental".
So... give him an astronaut suit to wear for a day and tell him it's a reward for good grades or something.
When I was in elementary and high school, I learned the incompleteness of science well enough; it was not omitted, at least not for those who were actually interested enough to PAY ATTENTION. No, it wasn't described explicitly in big neon flashing letters, but honestly should it be? As I said, someone paying attention would have extrapolated this message. Don't we want scientists who are actually interested enough in the subject to pay attention to the messages not presented in neon?
I stand vindicated! I've been reading seditious material my whole life and really did need that tinfoil hat to keep the FBI from reading my seditious thoughts. No wonder my high school English teacher declared that science fiction wasn't literature and refused to allow book reports about it, she was protecting us from the FBI!
... you should read the actual text of the law and figure out what the suggested punishment for "personal copyright infringement" actually is.
You didn't read it either, did you?
I can add that the closest historical parallel to what is not being called piracy might be land squatting. It's not a perfect analog, but the best that comes to mind.
That's quite a non sequitur. Laptops are physical, tangible, personal property. Digital "content", whatever its form, is immaterial, intangible, and the "crime" we're talking about here is not theft: the alleged owner(s) of the content are never at any time deprived of their use of it, nor are any of the other people "licensed" to use it deprived of that usage. That "denial of usage" is an essential characteristic of any action that might be described as theft. There is no theft taking place in these instances, only REPLICATION. There is no denial of anything except PREDICTED SPECULATIVE profit.
Sorry, bub. That is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Either you've been had by greedy manipulative people or you're one of the manipulators yourself.
What if they are privately run prisons? Those are very profitable and all the rage now.
TEN years imprisonment for personal copyright infringement, what is actually a civil tort, when other actual crimes so often result in sentences less than that? What a surprise that corporations want to criminalize anything that might reduce their already insane profits, and bribe lawmakers to do their bidding for them and leave their hands unbloodied. In a more honest transparent world they'd just hire mercenary squads to go murder or maim people who dare question their perpetual copyrights. Is this a civilized world, with all its layers upon layers of scheming and misdirection and manipulation?
The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to watch someone else doing it wrong, without commenting. -- T.H. White