28 replies to this topic

[Fire Blazer]

For U.S. Residents only:

http://www.americancensorship.org/

Help fight against this very terrible act of Congress! If it goes through the internet is SCREWED! THIS IS NOT A JOKE!

Also, tell everyone you know! We can't let this happen! Never! Ever! IT'D BE THE END OF YOUTUBE, FACEBOOK, AND EVERYTHING ELSE AS WE KNOW IT.

[Zepher Tensho]

Theres a petition online as well as that letter. Me and my gf signed it already. Here it is for anyone who wants to sign too

http://www.change.or...ontrol-bill-now

[Fire Blazer]

**** yeah dude get the whole military in on this! XD

[SmashedFish]

****ing beat me to it, why don't you. Good to see we've got concerned people though. You going to black out the logo to protest?

[Zepher Tensho]

[kirant]

Most of these bills are actually quite reasonable if you can take a look at the legal bill itself. I've skimmed the document and can't be sure I picked up everything, but I'll post what I have put on other forums because, frankly, I get tired of having to type the same things over and over

[Fire Blazer]

I never made an argument to start with for me to hide anything. I told people outright to protest this bill in any way possible because simply put it won't do anything good for the common internet user, and will more than likely hurt them, and that's not really legitimately arguable.

Thus you're overreacting IMO

[kirant]

[SmashedFish]

[kirant]

[SmashedFish]

[kirant]

[SmashedFish]

QUOTE (kirant @ Nov 19 2011, 03:01 PM)

lucky me, i get a whole essay

Okay, it is at this point why I realize that:

[img]http://www.mspaintadventures.com/extras/ps000040_4.gif[.img]

You're Canadian, so you have no say in US politics. That's not an insult or racism, that's a fact. Your defending a bill that nobody likes isn't doing anything, and let's face it, Cracked be damned, there is no single good reason to censor the content of the internet. Sure Youtube does it, and that's fine for them, but information remains eternally free. Everyone would just use proxies or something anyway.

I will pick on your section on roms, though. Who's going to devote a whole 24 hours to completing a single Fire Emblem any rom or romhack? Nobody. Then why should you only keep it for 24 hours? It's the proper legal procedure, but who cares?

I'd save your breath replying, as I'm wasting time here that I could be spending playing Oblivion (which I got from an illegal LAN fileshare, ironically) and I'm not continuing this further. You're really not getting anywhere, anyway; like I said, nobody's going to agree to have the Net censored for themselves because a Canadian said so. No personal hard feelings or anything.

[kirant]

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

Fixed your image.

Will pick on your snarky comment about my posting though. I think you're a perfect example of WHY the internet reacts the way its does. There is a basic inability for anyone it seems, to read anything beyond the digestive length of the average bowel movement...maybe less. My post is, astonishingly, pretty short and just takes a small amount of thinking to understand. One forum I frequent often has the average poster in the age of 28+. Our posts span easily double the length of the one you seem have to so lovingly "read" on topics that actually fire us up, complete with research reports and technical terminology in topics we're not trained in (I'm an Engineering student myself, so sociological understandings aren't my key education). Timing myself reading it, it was about a 3 minute read with about 5 minutes of pretend searching of data if you had a complete non-understanding of the economic models. If one cannot sit down and process data from that, it's no wonder why nobody bothered reading the bill and, instead of noting the details of the bill, decided to read the short, bias versions that are fed to us by activists and rant and scream that the bill is unfair and unjust to them.

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

You're Canadian, so you have no say in US politics. That's not an insult or racism, that's a fact.

But it has no impact on the debate. I'm arguing from a fundamental point of view. My nationality is outside of the scope. Any reasoning that I am wrong because of the fact that that I'm Canadian is plain ad hominem. No...I'm arguing the logic and the practical implementation.

I should also note that you failed to read the point where I said my status wouldn't change if I was an American (where it WOULD impact me).

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

Your defending a bill that nobody likes isn't doing anything, and let's face it, Cracked be damned, there is no single good reason to censor the content of the internet. Sure Youtube does it, and that's fine for them, but information remains eternally free. Everyone would just use proxies or something anyway.

1) You're. Just a pet peeve.
2) When did I say I expect any change due to my statements? My reasoning is two-fold. This topic is a area devoted to exchange of ideas. Because my statements have no impact is outside the point. Secondly, I seek to provide a logically based, reason based point of view.
3) You think I wouldn't know that? The impact of the bill I think will be minimal as I've stated multiple times. Proxies are a part of it unless ISPs physically disallow connection from their servers to the site, IP be damned.

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

I will pick on your section on roms, though. Who's going to devote a whole 24 hours to completing a single Fire Emblem any rom or romhack? Nobody. Then why should you only keep it for 24 hours? It's the proper legal procedure, but who cares?

Nobody. You fail to grasp that the intent and the implications of the law are two entirely different entities. The intent of the 24 hours is to allow deletion from the computer. The implementation is that it's ignored.

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

I'd save your breath replying, as I'm wasting time here that I could be spending playing Oblivion (which I got from an illegal LAN fileshare, ironically) and I'm not continuing this further.

Oh my. What a fairweather debater I have here. Well, you go ahead and do that if you want. I thought it would be nice to complete this post for the sake of completing it though. Maybe if someone else on this forum fancies a little information from an opposite opinion, it might seek them out better.

Also, since you're an American by all accounts, wouldn't it be better to learn about this bill that actually will affect you? I know Oblivion is fun...I've spent countless hours on it. But you're nearly 18...probably a good time to start learning the politics. Or, you could become politically apathetic, which seems to be a common ailment of the country...become part of the problem, not of the solution. Heck, I'm a Canadian and the only impact it has on my is the fact that it clogs up the forums and lets me do a little light reading and it seems I've read more about it that almost anyone protesting it. Almost everyone I've talked to who has read it has made peace with it if it came to be.

QUOTE (ectoBiologist @ Nov 19 2011, 06:59 PM)

You're really not getting anywhere, anyway; like I said, nobody's going to agree to have the Net censored for themselves because a Canadian said so. No personal hard feelings or anything.

I think this is proof of critical reading failure.

QUOTE (Like...it's own paragraph)

I don't expect to change minds, but I try to stand as a voice of reason. I see myself as a man who reads through the bill, applies a little logic and basic real work knowledge, and tries to explain where it stands. Even if you don't agree with me, I want you to see that there's reasoning behind the bill and that it's not entirely a black and white issue here.

[Fire Blazer]

It's true that it's being hyped up and anti-censorship sites are giving out a biased perspective of the bill and its details, as few as they include. But honestly, I don't mind if it's exaggerated. To me it's like giving out the worst possible situation which is reason enough to fear a change that may hurt me and many other common internet-goers.

You say it's unlikely to be as big and crazy and spread out as discussion implies but the fact that there is still a chance is scary enough to me. As a parallel say that there is a virus spreading in one city. To prevent the virus from spreading they quarantine them and they do this for up to 5 years until the virus is naturally fought off (it's not a fatal virus but it makes people quite sick to the point that they wouldn't be able to live a normal life, and it IS a contagious virus).

Say the virus spreads a little more regardless and it goes from a city to a county and a county to a state. The influence of the government in order to maintain the virus becomes more as they need to quarantine more and more people. Not only does this happen, but also other cities pop-up with the virus all of a sudden too, and THEY start getting infected.

Worse come to worst, the entire country is infected and people who catch this sickly virus are quarantined. Just like how this bill might result in greater control and censorship of "civilian" actions on the internet. The government might be lazy and people might continue to be "infected"--do things that in some cases aren't "appropriate" or they might just quarantine anyone who they think is infected, even if they aren't (equivalent to say punishing someone for posting a music cover on youtube or something, which I think is harmless--maybe THIS idea is wrong but if it is I'd like to hear why).

I can't remember where I'm even going with this and I don't have the time to read everything you said and respond to it (though I used to be like you and type huge posts) so I'm going to leave it at that... Try and be a little more concise though Kirant so we can have a more focused discussion XD

[kirant]

QUOTE (Blazer @ Nov 20 2011, 10:47 AM)

To me it's like giving out the worst possible situation which is reason enough to fear a change that may hurt me and many other common internet-goers.

The problem with giving out the worst possible scenario is its likeliness is so extreme that it's never going to happen. For example, I could tell you the worst case scenario for riding an elevator is that, while you're on the 10th floor, every single cable snaps and the springs fail. This will send you plummeting down 10 floors, likely to your death due to the impact. I could tell you that the worst case scenario for breathing in air is that every particle is lined up just right and that you'll cause a nuclear explosion, killing yourself and everyone in a ten mile radius. The worst case scenario doesn't mean a whole lot unless it's probable.

QUOTE (Blazer @ Nov 20 2011, 10:47 AM)

You say it's unlikely to be as big and crazy and spread out as discussion implies but the fact that there is still a chance is scary enough to me. As a parallel say that there is a virus spreading in one city. To prevent the virus from spreading they quarantine them and they do this for up to 5 years until the virus is naturally fought off (it's not a fatal virus but it makes people quite sick to the point that they wouldn't be able to live a normal life, and it IS a contagious virus).

The last real life comparable was the SARS outbreak in NA. It was expected, it arrived, and it was handled effectively. Legal measures were taken swiftly and preparedness was key. The scare was very limited in length. I think this is a great comparable because of the fact that we're all expecting this bill to come and, should we deal with it rationally, its scope will never go out f bounds. We're already getting OSPs like Google and Yahoo saying they'll be watching over their demands from the US government to no end. With watchdogs and a whole whack of people looking over it, there's no doubt that any step out of line will cause immediate dissent.

[Holy Kensai]

Okay, kinda off topic. But.
The SARS outbreak was not handled well at all. It went worldwide. And it was not expected. It happened and then after it was gone everyone was like "Oh yeah, SARS, we have totally been preparing for that for like, months."
And you trust Google? Let's just throw this out there. Google can have access to your e-mails, personal information, social life, group/friend web, texts, phone history, pretty much everything you do that uses any technology. People who work for Google never even need to leave the building they work in. When you look at it, Google owns youtube, it owns the most popular search engine, they can easily control every bit of information that gets to you. One might even be so bold to state that if there is such a commotion on the internet about this bill, Google is probably behind it. So just sign the website and stop whining.

[kirant]

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 20 2011, 01:40 PM)

Okay, kinda off topic. But. The SARS outbreak was not handled well at all. It went worldwide. And it was not expected. It happened and then after it was gone everyone was like "Oh yeah, SARS, we have totally been preparing for that for like, months."

As I said, I was speaking on the NA handling of the situation and the reaction compared to past epidemics. When we compare how far a little preparation went when it was compared to times when no preparation was done, the results were far better. The fact that it's the worse than anything you or I have seen in our lifetime is pretty meaningless. We haven't seen something that intimidating in a while.

Additionally, I am aware it is a worldwide pandemic. It started as a HK to Vancouver event. I was stating that NA did a pretty good job of handling it.

EDIT - If memory serves, the media went nuts over the entire of 44 deaths from SARS in Canada. I think there was even a play or something over it...SARSical? Even bigger...the US had no deaths I think.

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 20 2011, 01:40 PM)

And you trust Google? Let's just throw this out there. Google can have access to your e-mails, personal information, social life, group/friend web, texts, phone history, pretty much everything you do that uses any technology. People who work for Google never even need to leave the building they work in.  When you look at it, Google owns youtube, it owns the most popular search engine, they can easily control every bit of information that gets to you. One might even be so bold to state that if there is such a commotion on the internet about this bill, Google is probably behind it.

The last statement is one of paranoia and is much of a conspiracy theory. Hand me solid evidence that would implicate something like that and we'll talk. Heck, I'm pretty sure Google's public stance was that of being against the bill. (I think the last stance was the pro side being Microsoft, Apple, Nintendo, EA and Sony, while the side against it was Mozilla, Facebook, Google, Twitter, eBay and Yahoo).

Again too, it's potential/realized effect. We have no evidence yet to suspect that Google has any effect

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 20 2011, 01:40 PM)

So just sign the website and stop whining.

Aww...is logic now equal to whining? I'll be sure to phone up Websters and tell them to update the dictionary. Really, neither side is whining.

[Holy Kensai]

North America did a poor job of handling it, unless you consider the policy of "lock up everyone, spread paranoia" about a flu that gave you a fever and cold, where you were only in danger if you had something already life-threatening a good handling job.

And yet I notice you have not disagreed with the rest of the statement.
And what you said would actually support the conspiracy theory. Google opposes it and thus is behind the large commotion behind it.

Logic is not equal to whining. However.
whining present participle of whine (Verb)
Verb:

1. Give or make a long, high-pitched complaining cry or sound.
2. Complain in a feeble or petulant way.
You're committing number two.

[kirant]

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 21 2011, 07:47 PM)

North America did a poor job of handling it, unless you consider the policy of "lock up everyone, spread paranoia" about a flu that gave you a fever and cold, where you were only in danger if you had something already life-threatening a good handling job.

Lock people up was considered probably the best solution. Paranoia was the fact that media wasn't competent and everyone threw so much light into the pure fact that there were actually 44 deaths. Confusing what media did and what governments did in the panic session is key. Not to mention the fact that all other similar events were handled much, MUCH worse. Even if we use this to isolate the concept of even a little planning, that little planning made it much better than last historical cases...even if you do consider the outbreak a mess.

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 21 2011, 07:47 PM)

And yet I notice you have not disagreed with the rest of the statement.

Google holds power. That is a known fact. What they do with it is unknown. I myself have no reason to believe they abuse it. If you have evidence or reasoning, bring them forward...I can't read your mind.

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 21 2011, 07:47 PM)

And what you said would actually support the conspiracy theory. Google opposes it and thus is behind the large commotion behind it.

Again, we have no evidence of it. If you do, I do implore you to bring it forward. Yet...really, you've shown me nothing. With the same amount of backing, we could claim that JFK was an inside job...that 9/11 was planned by the government...that the loss of the Canucks and subsequent riot was a well placed gambit by Canadian terrorists! All these conspiracy theories have reason behind them, but not evidence...which is all a conspiracy theory is. What separates them from arguable facts is that we have evidence of fact. I'm open minded, but I'm also skeptical if the proof isn't there...again, if we have statements or hard points, I'd be more than willing to discuss the merits of them. If not, I'm fine throwing it aside with such nonsense as "we never landed on the moon" or "werewolves exist" (well, at least to my knowledge. I'd love to meet a werewolf or other shapeshifter though for the pure scientific aspect of it).

QUOTE (Holy Kensai @ Nov 21 2011, 07:47 PM)

1. Give or make a long, high-pitched complaining cry or sound. 2. Complain in a feeble or petulant way. You're committing number two.

Oh? And how so? You simply make accusations without backing.

If you have support of that notion or explain how it is whining, I might listen...however, across several forums, you're the first to call it whining. Even when I discuss this topic with much more mature, knowledgeable, and far less patient individuals than your or I, I've yet to hear the word whine applied to these forms of statements from no one.