There is nothing to be done about this, dude. Pricks will be pricks and 90% of people are still live by Pavlovian reflexes. If it is not protected they take it and don't calculate consequences. That is why we still have government which is just a form of protection from people becoming cavemen again. A shitty form of protection but there is no better alternative unfortunately.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
American Censorship: Round 2
- Thread starter celebi23
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
There is nothing to be done about this, dude. Pricks will be pricks and 90% of people are still live by Pavlovian reflexes. If it is not protected they take it and don't calculate consequences. That is why we still have government which is just a form of protection from people becoming cavemen again. A shitty form of protection but there is no better alternative unfortunately.
Dark Machine
Member
And that's not a problem I can fix. Nor it is a problem that will necessarily affect the salaries of those executives in the media conglomerates. Instead, it affects the people who create the content. That's my concern.
Wouldn't it be possible...you know...err...for you to maybe get together with some other people in your industry, network and get round the table and such and dicuss this topic. I agree with the sentiments above that TV as a medium is dying, and the net is accelerating it. The BIG thing is 'On Demand'. Regular people want the stuff you create, but they hate two main things:
1. The fact they have to be in a certain place and at a certain time to view it. (solved by DVRs/Streaming).
2. (Young males especially) Hate having to pay for stuff, especially if it goes to bigwigs in suits rather than you directly.
So wouldn't it be possible for you and some cohorts to try and start your own company producing shows that you'd then release totally online or through a TV On Demand service or even something like iTunes? (Virgin Media and Sky have them over here in the UK, they're very popular). That way you could get paid by advertising, paid by subs to your 'channel' or website etc. And it would help dent piracy a bit. It worked for iTunes, once people got used to paying for online content, it really worked. I suppose it'd be very difficult for you personally though, but it's just an idea.
Back on topic: Thank Jebus the EU have firmly opposed this bill and started making committed noises toward Net Neutrality.
There is nothing to be done about this, dude. Pricks will be pricks and 90% of people are still live by Pavlovian reflexes. If it is not protected they take it and don't calculate consequences. That is why we still have government which is just a form of protection from people becoming cavemen again. A shitty form of protection but there is no better alternative unfortunately.
I agree. Sucks.
So you mean pirates have that mentality? I don't think you can blame people for wanting content, and I don't think they claim ownership of it either.
There's a demand for content, but sometimes no legal way to obtain it. I don't know what else to say.
I know. It's just... yeah. I know this bill will do nothing to stop piracy, but it's clear why it's tempting to some.
I also think we don't have to worry, even if (and when) this passes the house. It won't survive a Senate filibuster or cloture vote, so why even worry?
Wouldn't it be possible...you know...err...for you to maybe get together with some other people in your industry, network and get round the table and such and dicuss this topic. I agree with the sentiments above that TV as a medium is dying, and the net is accelerating it. The BIG thing is 'On Demand'. Regular people want the stuff you create, but they hate two main things:
1. The fact they have to be in a certain place and at a certain time to view it. (solved by DVRs/Streaming).
2. (Young males especially) Hate having to pay for stuff, especially if it goes to bigwigs in suits rather than you directly.
So wouldn't it be possible for you and some cohorts to try and start your own company producing shows that you'd then release totally online or through a TV On Demand service or even something like iTunes? (Virgin Media and Sky have them over here in the UK, they're very popular). That way you could get paid by advertising, paid by subs to your 'channel' or website etc. And it would help dent piracy a bit. It worked for iTunes, once people got used to paying for online content, it really worked. I suppose it'd be very difficult for you personally though, but it's just an idea.
I'm an assistant to an assistant. I'm not changing anything. And my career trajectory over the next few years will be towards a path that creates content, not one that broadcasts or distributes or holds the rights to that content.
And, this is getting off-topic. I'll PM you my response.
sans_pants
avec_pénis
Wouldn't it be possible...you know...err...for you to maybe get together with some other people in your industry, network and get round the table and such and dicuss this topic. I agree with the sentiments above that TV as a medium is dying, and the net is accelerating it. The BIG thing is 'On Demand'. Regular people want the stuff you create, but they hate two main things:
1. The fact they have to be in a certain place and at a certain time to view it. (solved by DVRs/Streaming).
2. (Young males especially) Hate having to pay for stuff, especially if it goes to bigwigs in suits rather than you directly.
So wouldn't it be possible for you and some cohorts to try and start your own company producing shows that you'd then release totally online or through a TV On Demand service or even something like iTunes? (Virgin Media and Sky have them over here in the UK, they're very popular). That way you could get paid by advertising, paid by subs to your 'channel' or website etc. And it would help dent piracy a bit. It worked for iTunes, once people got used to paying for online content, it really worked. I suppose it'd be very difficult for you personally though, but it's just an idea.
Back on topic: Thank Jebus the EU have firmly opposed this bill and started making committed noises toward Net Neutrality.
right now creating content is still very expensive, of course thats also a function of the industry. it could be cheaply done now to an extent if everyone was willing to take less money, not get super rich, but make pretty good money while getting to work in a creative field, which is a dream for everyone in the industry that doesnt have to wear a suit.
those guys in suits still control all the money right now and refuse to adapt to the internet. theres nothing anyone on the creative side can do except create and market their own shit, like louis ck or radiohead. thats all fine and well but they already have huge audiences and can afford to take that risk. of course, its becoming less of a risk as technology advances. musicians can fairly cheaply set up home studios, dslrs can cheaply produce amazing images, editing software is easier to use and cheaper than ever. i predict an art renaissance thanks to technology coming in the next few years, assuming things dont get more draconian than they already are
Yes!Official letter from EU Parliament against SOPA
http://euletter-sopa-pipa.tumblr.com/post/14113460718/final-letter-with-signatures
Short, clear and to the point. Awesome read, go EU.Official letter from EU Parliament against SOPA
http://euletter-sopa-pipa.tumblr.com/post/14113460718/final-letter-with-signatures
Seriously, it's okay to track down infrigement and punish it but blocking websites globally based on infringements of it's individual users based on local law? Fuck no.
hahahahaha, they turned down the amendment for user-generated content and sites.
THESE PEOPLE ARE DUMB FUCKS.
I thought that elected politicians might be a little bit smarter because they have to earn these votes. but no, it seems that they are still dumb fucks. Way to go, US.
THESE PEOPLE ARE DUMB FUCKS.
I thought that elected politicians might be a little bit smarter because they have to earn these votes. but no, it seems that they are still dumb fucks. Way to go, US.
I just saw a commercial on Comedy Central encouraging people to call congress in SUPPORT of the act.... smh...
Really? For fucks sake.
The fundamental mistakes many people and organizations make when attempting to sum up the effects of piracy are assuming a download equals a lost viewer approaching a 1/1 ratio and the tired old correlation equals causation fallacy. Groups also love to count the number of downloads by counting the number of torrent links downloaded, which is ridiculous.
It may be that pirating is killing industries, but we can't say that based on the terrible reasoning employed by those with a vested interest in promoting it as a cause for their poor performance. The fact is, the Internet and piracy have risen together, and which of those two events gets the bulk of the blame for why an industry is worse off today seems to depend entirely on who you ask and where they make their money.
It may be that pirating is killing industries, but we can't say that based on the terrible reasoning employed by those with a vested interest in promoting it as a cause for their poor performance. The fact is, the Internet and piracy have risen together, and which of those two events gets the bulk of the blame for why an industry is worse off today seems to depend entirely on who you ask and where they make their money.
Nope, even if just 1% of the public votes, that's still legitimate for them ;-)hahahahaha, they turned down the amendment for user-generated content and sites.
THESE PEOPLE ARE DUMB FUCKS.
I thought that elected politicians might be a little bit smarter because they have to earn these votes. but no, it seems that they are still dumb fucks. Way to go, US.
Also, does that mean in theory Deviantart could be blocked because it hosts fanart?
planar1280
Banned
Uh Oh
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...e-right-to-block-or-remove-youtube-videos.ars
UMG: we have the right to block and remove any youtube video, even the ones we do not own not under DMCA act but under contract between Youtube and UMG
WHAT THE F!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...e-right-to-block-or-remove-youtube-videos.ars
UMG: we have the right to block and remove any youtube video, even the ones we do not own not under DMCA act but under contract between Youtube and UMG
WHAT THE F!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sure this won't pass. I don't want to believe they some people are so dumb and corrupt. Even if they are.
If it does we can guarantee that if anyone says "America is the best nation on earth" is now a comical phrase.
Wouldn't internet censorship, a failed education and one of the worst health care services on the planet make the US the worst developed nation at present?
If it does we can guarantee that if anyone says "America is the best nation on earth" is now a comical phrase.
Wouldn't internet censorship, a failed education and one of the worst health care services on the planet make the US the worst developed nation at present?
This won't pass and you're being ridiculous.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
This won't pass and you're being ridiculous.
I truly hope you're right. You'll have to forgive our lack of faith, though.
I'm sure this won't pass. I don't want to believe there are some people are so dumb and corrupt. Even if they are.
You're watching a House debate. Even if it passes the House, it has to clear the Senate. Clearing the Senate has always been the real issue with this legislation.
This won't pass and you're being ridiculous.
Or, this.
You're watching a House debate. Even if it passes the House, it has to clear the Senate. Clearing the Senate has always been the real issue with this legislation.
I'm not that familiar with american politics. Are there more decent people in Senat than in House of Representatives?
timetokill
Banned
I'm not that familiar with american politics. Are there more decent people in Senat than in House of Representatives?
No, they're all scum.
Just the Senate doesn't like to pass anything.
Mr. Enigma
Member
Nothing happened with SOPA today. They adjourned the meeting at 1:30 PM. SOPA will not be discussed again until after the new year.
I'm not that familiar with american politics. Are there more decent people in Senat than in House of Representatives?
It's much harder to pass legislation in the Senate. The discourse is *slightly* more intelligent (but not really), and it's right now it's a slightly more liberal body (which may actually kill it in committee).
Really, the Senate will be SOPA's death. There's no way it can amass the 60 votes for cloture.
If you guys want, you can move the discussion to this topic:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=455818
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=455818
If pirates pirate because the content costs nothing, why would they suddenly start buying things if piracy ceased to exist?
I choose Netflix because it's cheaper than cable TV. If Netflix vanished, I wouldn't suddenly start paying for cable TV. I'd just go without TV, period. I choose Steam because I can get good deals on games that normally cost $60. If the Steam store closed down, I'd stop buying video games and just play my current ones.
In this case, where is new revenue coming from? How would the lack of piracy or the lack of Netflix affect distributors or cable companies?
I choose Netflix because it's cheaper than cable TV. If Netflix vanished, I wouldn't suddenly start paying for cable TV. I'd just go without TV, period. I choose Steam because I can get good deals on games that normally cost $60. If the Steam store closed down, I'd stop buying video games and just play my current ones.
In this case, where is new revenue coming from? How would the lack of piracy or the lack of Netflix affect distributors or cable companies?
Nothing happened with SOPA today. They adjourned the meeting at 1:30 PM. SOPA will not be discussed again until after the new year.
They'll discuss SOPA next Wednesday (December 21!) at 9am EST, before the west coast wakes up.
Mr. Luchador
Member
So, America are wanting to put forward a bill that will allow them (only them?) to police the internet? I can't complain about this as I'm not American, and as such no-one in America represents me, yet they can tell UK authorities that I may have somehow infringed on copyright laws in America?
This is madness.
This is madness.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.