Yes it is big news if Google has ties with the administration, which is a good thing as we should not want that, and because some corrupted Google employers and fans think that any such criticism can be simply disposed of by pointing to an entity everyone hates, and mod such redirections as "Insightful". I'll probably be the "Troll". I guess you excuse murder, because O.J. got away with it, or, less dramatic, speeding, because not everyone gets a ticket. I find it despicable you failed to say anything about the actual corporate ties, and are only interested in battling the criticism, with stuff which is irrelevant like mentioning O.J. in a murder trial. In the meantime, I wonder if you voted Biden, and thus the RIAA into government? That would make you the ultimate hypocrite. In any case, it gets confusing. Google says vote Democrats, which means vote RIAA, but we can't criticize, because the RIAA is in government? Uhhhhmm.. make up your mind.

Which porn movie was that, with your mom in it?

I find your argument strange and confusing. You claim an expert opinion on this "as a writer", although one without credentials and publications.

You attack people for stating that a creative investment that can be copied infinitely creates the problem that no one will be getting paid, and for stating the pirates just take but don't provide a solution.

So you attack people who don't conveniently supply the solution for you, like they are you enemy, yet you don't explore any solution yourself, like the same people you attack, and the pirates. This is not their problem. It is yours.

Mr. Writer, let me ask you specifically, if I sit behind a desk for a year and write a novel, or in fact if I do anything that can be digitally copied, how do I make a living out of sharing that work with the world? They won't buy my t-shirts. And why are you ignoring what should be the most important question for a writer? Good thing you attacked those outdated, insane visions though. Me as a self-declared yet momentarily inactive writer, painter, musician and uber creator in general, think your view is suspiciously simplistic and of one shade in a two-colored world.

Why are you having a discussion with a trolling idiot?

Actually, no, there is no difference between the porn industry enforcing their copyright, or a guy with a recipe that was included in some cook book. Or you are against both entities making money through copyright and tell the cook to stuff it, or you accept that both have to right to invest in a product and protect it by copyright. What is it? If you choose one way here and the other there, based on sympathy, you are an utter and complete hypocrite, and probably just a petty thief justifying himself.

There is a funny thing about this argument, or better, about the response usually given to this argument. The responses usually are that Apple is in fact good value for money because you get this and that and the cheaper competition doesn't, etc. etc. Even Apple PR itself will say this when trolled.

Now cue to Apple, corporate site, where they don't talk customer language but investor language. Why should I buy AAPL, according to Apple? According to Apple, because of their profit maximization. Funny, that.

What exactly in the phrase "Sure they do" makes you think people don't get satire and self-parody. And is this from an American? Irony is satire explained by an American as if only he understands the concept. I had to LOL. Next look up bigotry.

Sure they do. I don't think it was very good satire though, it was a little bit too easy, and going for dramatic effect and sympathy of the cause of improving the labor conditions of etc. etc..., of something far way.. now what would have made it good and art is if he had dared to satire the Simpson's own blood, by focusing on the American animators who lost their jobs, went on the become pizza delivery men and women, had to give up their houses because of the mortgage, and started the whole world economy crisis - except for South Korea where they keep increasing their living standards and have surpassed us on several levels already.

Yes I bothered to read the summary. Now fuck off.

Here's an example of such data as captured from a potential terrorrrrrrirst:

Traffic: All goes to suckitup.is

Location: Roaming wifi

Related data: The Fifth of November

Personally I don't get this charging thing. It will be slow and inefficient.

Why can't I just swap batteries at the "gas" station? Problem solved.

You have problems understanding an argument. I recommend brain amputation, it can only get better.

Nope, you won it. Yours is infinitely less well-constructed.

But carry on battling privacy for the sake of billionaires, without any argumentation at all. I suspect you are not a lobbyist, but just a mere complete and total idiot.

And Google is in your slashdot, modding your and mine comment to oblivion (you troll!), while minifying/laughing away/ridiculing any concerns and placing insightful comments about how all is well.

Spammers gather email addresses from the open internet. According to your argument it is ok to spam millions of email addresses. Also, I could stand across the street and watch you leave the house and take notes. The government could also do this, watching thousands of civilians in a gigantic operation. According to your simple pro-google argumenation, this is ok. Why is it exactly you are defending an ad broker that needs more profit every year selling your private data to the highest bidder, and which works with an army of lobbyists to make sure your rights are not defended? Are you a lobbyist?