Why are they special and don't have to save for retirement like 99.99% of the rest of the world, the world does not owe them or anybody else a conformable retirement.

If there was no copyright companies would not have to do this at all I could go to a web site and download any show that has aired, because someone would have made a copy. (like we can now but illegally). I could put it on a flash drive for less than the cost of a DVD. We have limited access to old shows because copyright allows dumb things like the Disney Vault that allows companies to extort money out of the population.

Yes they would because sharing code is insanely more efficient than writing your own from scratch. It would be in their interest to do so, GPL is probably more of a reaction to people copyrighting things. And if a company can't compete with 14 year old code then it should go out of business if someone that is capitalism for you.

My question is why did Peter Jackson have to pay Tolkien estate anything? Did making those movies detract for Lord of the rings book sales at all? What exactly did he take from them? It added to the books not removed from them. Did the estate do any extra work to earn that money. I think you get to say I/My estate created book and if you buy it a percentage of the proceeds go to the original author for ever. A significant number people will pay extra for that, just like people will pay for Panadol over paracetamol but not insane amounts.

Just because you could of made money if copyright was longer doesn't mean that its a good or necessary thing.

We can't see enough rogue planets or other matter floating through space, to confirm the ordinary matter hypothesis

No it's stronger than that. You can work out things you ought to see if there are enough rogue planets and other baryonic matter floating through space. We don't see the predictions of that either which means it's not likely to be just unilluminated normal matter.

You talk about the pile of observations that don't match "known physics" and yet you and your physicist friends are still highly confident in your "dark matter" hypothesis.

OK at this point you're just being obtuse and more than a bit rude. I literally said I wasn't that convinced by it. And you come back with that. Can you not? Being able to point out all the flaws in your hypothesis doesn't mean I am strongly convinced by the hypothesis you are trying to shoot down.

But your hypothesis of "maybe it's normal matter" has been somewhat well ruled out.

order to fit the standard model.

What do you think the standard model even is? You seem to be using it in ways that it's use doesn't make much sense.

Every new instrument we send up, most recently the JWST, has called into question many things we thought we knew, such as mature galaxies 33.9 billion light-years away. This should not be possible, either in terms of how quickly they formed after the Big Bang, or in terms of how the light could have reached us in 13.8 billion years. Such observations require ever-more exotic explanations (like inflation) in order to fit the standard model.

You've mixed up a bunch of things here. First this has nothing to do with inflation: the (hypothesised) inflationary epoch happened much earlier than galaxy formation, so it was long finished when the galaxy emitted its light. Second the distance is its estimated distance now. It took 12 billion years for the light to arrive, but in the intervening time, the universe has been expanding pushing the galaxy ever further away from us. So it's "now" 33.9 billion years away. Also, this is all cosmology shit not HEP, so it's not got much to do with the standard model.

This is wrong. It's A Wonderful Life was copyrighted. The copyright wasn't renewed in 1974 by what is called a "clerical error" (probably means somebody forgot to do the paperwork) by the company that bought the rights to the film some time after it was released. Stuff like this played a role in why the somewhat infamous Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act had a provision to automatically renew copyrights for free since various things had entered the public domain because somebody forgot to do some paperwork. I would argue that if the copyrights are so valuable then they shouldn't be renewed for free, but that's beyond the scope of why the film entered the public domain.

Why would I care about obvious economic impact? If you made it 5 years these companies would project out for 5 years. They may stop spending hundreds of millions on shows and movies while people struggle to make ends meet. They may become more efficient and not hire people to link chain mail for 2 years https://www.facebook.com/watch... , something that only the most OCD of film goers would even notice. Maybe they would be forced to share graphics resources.

I think its actually the reverse is in effect. The more you pay, the more expensive the movies become to make if movies made half the amount then top actors would simply get paid less, oh no they would only get 1 million per movie as opposed to 10, I think they would suck it up. You wouldn't pay normal actors less because they still need to live. It would also drive down the cost of software so more amateurs could make movies because it would have to.

That is how capitalism works constant competition cost pressure drives efficiency up.

Its like asking a lion what it would like in its prey, you will eventually end up with fat lazy lion that can't hunt.

To me the problem with movies today is not the effects but the lack of interesting stories, and it makes sense when are risking hundreds of millions of dollars you are not likely to take risks

The first paragraph is sort of reasonable, but fraught with confounders. The second is just making the original error but substituting the author's pet cause and adding some religious weirdness. Fortunately the exact same argument deals with it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The highest per capita meat consuming countries are non-muslim. The muslim countries are all mid tier except for a couple gulf states, including Qatar.

Sacrificing animals is big part of Islamic religious ritual.

Lol. It's a big part of Christian religious ritual too. That doesn't mean people do it very often.

Except me and hundreds of millions of others on X alone.

Is that some kind of defense against something?

When you consider this leftist moral panic is so bad,

You're speaking rightwing-nutcase-ese again, not English. In conventional English, people don't automatically know what weird piece of niche political fantasy is in your head and you actually need to tell people what you're talking about.

So I say again: what the actual fuck are you talking about? It's really no use blabbering references to talking points when I have not been deep enough in your bubble to have ever heard the talking points in the first place.

As even far leftists have been talking about mass Somali fraud and how they must be protected from evil racists that...

"mass Somali fraud" sounds like yet another racist conspiracy theory to me.

observed them running a massive fraud/terrorism support/funneling taxpayer donations to US Democratic Party via mass fraud.

Get that off one of the hundreds of millions of people on Xitter did you, eh?

I love it! Fraud. But also terrorism and Democrats. You can't even decide which conspiracy theory to hold to. But just fling them all at a bunch of black people regardless. Maybe they are using the fraud money to buy chemtrail fluid and pizza. Did you read about that in Hilary's emails taken off Hunter Biden's laptop?

Oxygen also causes cancer.

No, they're part of normal society that pushes their wishes and ideals as truths. Science is a weird niche branch of philosophy that says that's a bad way to generate knowledge.

That's hard enough for trained scientists to do never mind the masses. So the masses politicize papers with conclusions they don't like. Notice most of the arguments aren't about the data, they're something along the lines of "idiots won't understand this so it's dangerous to publish."

We were talking about why you can't send information faster than the speed of light. Nobody said communication via entangled particles was the same as classical communication. It requires classical communication. In the case you're talking about, that classical communication even has to come first.

I currently have six travel eSIMs in my phone

The article author transfers eSIMS between phones frequently, several times a month. Swapping eSIMS in one phone is easy, quick and much superior to the physical kind. Swapping between phones apparently runs into some problems if your carrier is braindead. That's what the article is complaining about.

You can buy a pay as you go eSIM for cash in many places too. It's the same thing. You can also buy a pay as you go eSIM without going to the store and showing your face to the employees and their security cameras.

Well that's new. Thanks for explaining. Apparently Luckyo didn't feel confident enough in his lunacy to expose it to scrutiny, but espouses it nonetheless.

Your hypothesis doesn't match observations.

You are right that this is all beyond the standard model and/or general relativity.

We have a pile of observations which don't match known physics and for which the current leading hypothesis is missing mass, yet we know the mass in that case can't entirely be ordinary matter, because it doesn't match that either. This is definitely the realm of new physics, without a doubt. Either there's some exotic new particle, or some other exotic new effect.

Whatever we have, singing is up here that doesn't fit into existing physics theories.

But if you think that will leave physicists humble, then all I can say is you don't know many physicists (especially theorists)!!

I know done theorists who are sure dark matter is real and done experimentalist just needs to find the particle. I'm less convinced it's a done deal myself. I wouldn't be enormously surprised if the standard candles weren't quite so standard either.

Yeah, everyone else is in a bubble except you. Sure...

But if you're not on the right when you grow up, you have no brain.

The right is philosophically incoherent and has no real direction except a miscellaneous grab bag of misanthropic ideas. Except for one thing which appears universal.

And that's pointing and yelling about how someone else is bad for doing something you're doing.

So if the right is telling me I have no brain, I can rest assured that all they're doing is trying to distract everyone (including themselves) from their own missing brain.

I find that the right wing has gone so far down the rabbit hole now that I have no fucking clue what you're even referring to.