You evaded his question.

The question isn't whose terrorists are "badder." Nevermind the fact I find it hard to swallow your argument that Ireland's terrorists are "less bad" than Afghanistan's/Pakistan's because they were willing to use political means in addition to their violence against civilians to achieve their aims. I think it is pretty safe to assume if Britain had had access to the drone technology during The Troubles it would have used it. British forces didn't seem to have any trouble with shooting civilians during the conflict, nor unlawfully (and often indefinitely) detaining them.

The question is, if Americans are in support of remote assassinations that are carried out by executive decision without scrutiny from courts or any sort of due process, how can they possibly decry the use of such strikes by foreign powers against American citizens?

And there is only one plausible answer to that question--they can't.

@ChaosEngine is saying that these drone strikes, if internationally sanctioned, will open Pandora's box. What say you to that?

You are right. They have taken it to a very extreme level. However, I can see their rationale to it. It's essentially a domino effect in that if the first person hadn't leaked it, then the 100k others wouldn't have gotten ahold of it. Does that make each one worth $450k . . . no.

I wouldn't mind seeing massive piraters sued for the monetary value of everything in their playlist (i.e., if it's a buck off iTunes, and they have 100k sounds, then they stole 100k.)

To say that every pirated piece is a lost sale, you are correct to say no. However, it still makes it a theft. While I technically didn't lose money . . . you still stole it. That's why I believe in ad revenue such as iTunes Radio, Pandora, I heart Radio etc. So I get doubly pissed when content providers make a song free via advertising, and then people bitch about that. lol Like, Hulu.

People normally pay $100/mo to watch 14 minutes of commercials per hour, but complain when they pay nothing to watch only 3 minutes worth.

I was all for ad revenue, except, my brother and I sold graphics. Not exactly something we could put ads on. We actually had people who'd buy it from us, and then throw it up on their site for a fraction of the price….

In that regard, if someone is profiting off my work, then the fabled revenue lost is 100% tangible. So for Megaupload et al who made real money (not just legit P2P sharing) I'm all for sticking them with the maximum fine possible. If I make a piece of digital goods and you make $1,000 off it, then that's my grand, not yours.

Which is why there are big stock photo/video sites who basically screw over the little person but are at least legit. They pay their up loaders, albeit small amounts, to generate profit off having tons of content. Way more content than any one individual can create. So the same as Megaupload, only, they're not stealing or encouraging people indirectly to use their service to host any and all files you'd like to share while we knowingly look the other way towards our profit margins.

Anyway, that's mostly a rant at this point. :-p

I know this song! Had no idea what the name of the song or the band was, but it's been playing on my Pandora station for months now.

Excellent find!

Living in Thailand, most TV shows aren't available here until WAY after the Western airdate, if ever.

I live in a pretty small town. Western movies don't play here, and if I travel an hour or so to a town where they do, they do they are dubbed in Thai with no English subtitles. DVDs are readily available, but they are usually pirated cam copies burned to disc, and again dubbed in Thai.

Games? Not available in stores in my town. Bangkok, sure -- but again they are almost always pirated copies burned to disk. Console games are the same way and any shops selling the game will also chip the console to play pirated disks. I could, and admittedly probably SHOULD use steam for PC games.

Other software? Basically same story as games. If you go to a computer store here, advertising usually says that they are sold with Linux OS or bare drives. But, the shop will automatically put on a pirated Windows plus loads of software (office, Photoshop if you ask for it, etc.) upon purchasing the hardware. They are usually fairly inept at it, frequently have viruses or fail to actually activate the OS, etc. so I tell them to leave the drives bare and do all that stuff myself. But for 99% of people who buy a PC here, they will automatically get a pirated OS and software along with it.

Basically, my default mode of getting ANY media is piracy. Price (free versus not) is a part of that. Incomes are low here, but cost of living is comparatively even lower. Still, if media was fully available here but equal to the price in, say, the US the vast majority of people here don't have enough disposable income to afford much if any of it. A bigger issue for me personally is convenience. Piracy (torrents, etc.) as a distribution system is infinitely more convenient, easy, and "customer"-friendly than any more legitimate service. I get what I want very quickly, usually in multiple options for filesize vs quality on up to as-good-as-broadcast/blu-ray 1080p, with most everything available from a single source (isoHunt, kickass, PirateBay, take your pick). In terms of user experience, legitimate distribution can't even begin to compete with that -- and that is BEFORE considering price.

Instead, they exacerbate the difference by treating paying customers with open contempt. Pay for TV service? Enjoy 10 minutes of ads for every 12 minutes of show. Buy a DVD? Sit through un-skippable ads, dire piracy warnings, etc. before the show actually starts. Move or simply take the disk on vacation to another country and you will likely be screwed by region locking. Buy software? Get some DRM that slows things down or restricts fully NORMAL use of the software, nags you to register, etc. On the other hand, if you pirate stuff all of that goes away. No ads. Watch/use the media wherever you want, whenever you want, on whatever device you want. Software DRM circumvented easily, usually hours after the first release if not *before*.

I honestly see it as a problem that I am not supporting the creators of the media that I enjoy. But, Pandora's box has been opened on this one. Generation X and Y learned to scoff at the idea of paying for music due to Napster. iTunes has been extremely lucky to turn that around even slightly, making lots of mistakes along the way (DRM and device-locking, etc.). Gen Y and beyond are going to have the same attitude towards piracy with regards to ALL MEDIA that we learned to have towards music. I don't think there is any getting around that.

For content creators, I think that funding via Label / Publisher / Network is going to die out. And soon. The good news is that something akin to an evolution of patronage of arts and creators can work even better than it did in the past. The Motzarts and Beethovens of the future don't need 1 rich duke or king to commision a work, they need 10,000 average Joes on kickstarter or the like. I see things trending more and more in that direction, and all the time. I think it is an exciting time -- unless you're an exec in one of the old dinosaur publishers/networks.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

Yet.

And I mean that. >> ^bcglorf:
This can't be overstated. Abhorrent as the Tea Party may be, they aren't actively executing their political opposition and they aren't trying to institute death by stoning for women convicted of adultery(eg. being rape victims).
>> ^messenger:
"EDITOR’S NOTE: While they have way too much in common, the actual Taliban uses political violence to achieve its ends and the Tea Party doesn’t — and that’s an important distinction." --moveon.org




I do agree with this sentiment as the Taliban does it's "thing" differently, it should be made known though that tonight (and other talks too) at the RNC convention there was a large outcry for: making sure we have the best military ever and forever, ever; and, Iran and Syria, we may attack you at random if we have Republicans in office, so just keep yourselves on your toes. Oh and if you didn't know, we didn't need to really talk to anyone in the world about anything because, America is NUMBER FUCKING ONE AND YOU BETTER FUCKING KNOW YOUR PLACE!!!

Atleast, that is how it came across to me as a whole... So, as we have a VERY powerful military I'd say that we are a very active terrorizer of other countries (NOT just Syria and Iran; Mitt decided that Cold War part two was an excellent idea/threat to make). They may not be the Taliban, but they have a Pandora's Box that I imagine if opened and used, kills FAR more than the Taliban could ever hope to accomplish, both good and bad guys...

But, basically that was the entire gist of the "foreign policy" talked about. I'm sure the world is enamored with us right now, we can just ask people on here: If you thought the RNC speech's were extremely pro-American "Empire'ish" making many of the talks rude, condescending, and downright scary... Please vote me up. Otherwise, go for the opposite (remember this should be for the foreign crowd, if your the U.S. just reply or you can vote down, and then I'll just assume your a Teabagger).

@MarineGunrock not really going against anything you said (what you said was right anyhow and feeds into what I'm saying), I just wanted to grab all the quotes you had.

>> ^bmacs27:

@kceaton1
It isn't clear that the cause is entirely genetic. There is strong evidence that environmental factors (e.g. in utero hormone exposure) seem to play a role. I think it's safest to say it is somehow neurological in nature, however all neurological development is an extremely complicated interplay of environment and genetic predispositions. The fact is we don't understand the neurological underpinnings of attraction well enough to say how exactly it develops, and therefore what factors contribute.
There is almost certainly a genetic component however.


Well I know this; there is a certain amount of wiggle room for sure otherwise we wouldn't have fetishes galore (that would be your psychology/brain/sub-conscious screwing up your natural instincts). Those can't ALL be necessarily genetic in nature. Yes, I understand the hormone issue, but to me that is an entirely separate subject that doesn't really apply. BUT, it is terribly interesting. But, certain types of visual cortex information and recognition has to start getting built into the system that is linked to your natural predisposition for sexual reproduction--some of that HAS TO happen even while you're In Utero and of course in adolescence. Now what all turns on and changes here is a slight mystery and MAY determine your sexuality, but it was determined a long time ago via genetics when the event would turn on and what would turn on. If it can change, this doesn't matter as it will still fire on cure, it's just that they have to figure it out first. Same thing goes for gender identity disorder. Same issues to some extent, but some things have been even more~enhanced.

It's what you find pleasing to the eye, these things start getting encoded and built into the brain as soon as the brain is being created (atleast the instinctual element, babies like symmetry and hate non-symmetry, usually, that type of encoding). But you're right on the other stuff, I just meant they "may" have something to worry about in the "testing" department in the future; were the U.S. becomes the China of gay children `In Utero`, if you know what I mean--could get ugly and laws may need to be passed...

Hopefully I didn't make things more confusing.
This is PART, JUST PART of the Pandora's Box a test would bring about...

I would disagree with one thing they said as it may be sooner or later true. I know it VERY MUCH ISN'T real or that it even exists right now, but it will only be a matter of time most likely--so they may have jumped the gun a bit on that comment (they should have said, "There is no test to see if your genetic structure makes you more inclined to be attracted to males, RIGHT NOW."--that would have been far more correct. Homosexuality DOES have a source; since it occurs across the entirety of the animal kingdom you can basically safely assume that its cause is a genetic trait (AND even if it was psychological, it would STILL be a genetic cause!).

So, YES, sooner or later there WILL BE a test for it. When this happens it's how we use this test that will make us a good people or horrific one (as I'm sure all of you can see how this per-knowledge could lead to huge issues--even worse what happens when people decide if they want a straight or gay baby...scary stuff indeed). I think we'll find as with most things we will use this ability to test for sexual preference (something tells me they may be linked to the same sequence, so we'll probably find both to be serious) it will have both good and bad reasons and applications (for all we know being straight may have certain co-morbidities and homosexuality will also again have its own independent list of co-morbidities...).

But for now, I'm glad there is absolutely no test... What an absolute Pandora's Box that will be!

It's not that Cenk is wrong about voting for McCain, that was just another Pandora's Box to be had at the table. I feel while John would "maybe" try to end this issue, as we've seen his past his stance changes from one way to the other when push comes to shove (gays in the military) he would still end up doing some if not most of the core Republican "threats". Which may mean that if it came down to the wire some sort of "law deal" would be made with house Republicans and they would force John to change his mind. I know John had a law on the books that got railroaded by this Citizens United fiasco--so he may have some actual flesh in the fight. I just need to see him commit/fight first before I believe the words.

But, anyway, you'd have to remember we'd have to deal with the pure drivel of his right hand...The Dumbass From Alaska: Sarah Palin! I'd like to say McCain was OK, he seemed fine circa 2000, but with the state of politics--no offense to Cenk as I think he's a smart guy--but I DON'T trust a damned word coming from ANY of their mouths. They say things TO GET PRESS COVERAGE for hells sake (but, this deserves press coverage)!!! So, yes, I think John is getting a hardy pass to "Go" here when he may not deserve it; John should have already made his move on the issue--if he has done more than introduce his old bill and disagree with the Citizens vs. United, that is all that I know he really did. He passed a law dealing with the subject so I'd assume he has a stake in it somewhere, it just hasn't been made all that clear--it's just talking for now (I'm going to go look for a bit myself as well, to see if I can find more direct maneuvers that he has done either against Citizens United or his bill that was ran over).

Obama talked a great talk, but we knew after two years we didn't get anything remotely close to a revolutionary or visionary president here--let alone progressive (the last progressive probably was Roosevelt to be truthful, I don't think Reagan or Clinton count at all, they just towed in the party lines and left partisanship, unchecked, to take a bigger hold in American politics and they both did a good job for THEIR parties), just a McPresident™ fully endorsed by: [list your 1000 companies here]. Obama is playing his cards close to the middle (not to the far left like oh so many think). I hate the Citizens United Decision and I'm astounded it hasn't been slapped down yet as it LITERALLY allows foreign interests to play with our politics--not funny. Just the business end of it is spooky enough. I hate Obama for a lot of issues, but just because one guy that diametrically opposes everything else he says has one VERY valid point I'm not going to take him on his offer until he commits to the point where his words cannot be swung 180 degrees. I'm betting that even now Sarah Palin thinks the Citizens United decision is either about people getting together to have a party or she thinks it's great; so really she likes it no matter what.

Imagine being in Iran right now, over having Citizens United resolved in the name of 'The People', instead we'd probably get a declaration of a third war instead--we could play this stupid game all day. I'd rather be disappointed in my president and wait for the courts to settle it, if they can--we can all thank Bush Junior for his absolute garbage taste in Justices...

I'm not a fan of John or Obama that much, but I WILL take Obama any-day over a Republican--right now in our current political climate; Republicans are toxic. Personally, I think John's main involvement does go back to the law he passed in 2002 for campaign finance reform. That of course was on the books when Citizens United came about and forced them to take that law into account and the prevailing Justices basically just sneered at it as they seemed to have a malicious view of the other side as their responses gave that away. They were snide and sarcastic in a matter which is neither, except to them--so did they get paid off? I'm thinking, somehow, YES, they did. I'm assuming someone cares at the level of government, it is getting harder to tell every year. Obama certainly doesn't help that issue. I really don't think John would have either, he may have saved us on finance reform for elections--electioneering--but, he would have enacted so many ridiculously TERRIBLE laws in place of the ONE bad law that we'd cry for our country. Plus, we might be in Iran considering the level of vitriolic talk from him and Sarah...

Rolling the dice with World War 3 looming...



That is the one thing that MAY keep John on your side throughout all of this as he did try the first time to try and sway their opinion and he also had an old law on the books that dealt with some of the issues presented.

I loved the original Tex Murphy games, they were so unique and still unsurpassed in terms of story telling IMO. I just bought the Pandora Directive from GOG, it still holds up pretty well. I hope their Kickstarter makes it, I'd really love another adventure.

*promote

>> ^Payback:

Pandora XXX: "You're not in Candace anymore."
CLASSIC.


Pandora will shit you out!

Pandora XXX: "You're not in Candace anymore."

CLASSIC.

As I said, copyright reform is needed. Also, the media companies have, for the most part, completely mishandled what should have been an incredibly profitable way to deliver their content. I get what you're saying about content creators spreading their own content. They're working on it! But running a business is an entirely different skill set, so distributing through a company that knows what they're doing (to the extent that they actually can pay you) makes more sense most of the time.>> ^MilkmanDan:

>> ^DrewNumberTwo:
99% of the people of the world are pirates? There's about one computer for every three people. My parents don't even know what pirating is. There are less than 10 billion people on Earth, not 50 billion. This guy's exaggeration makes it look like he just doesn't know what he's talking about.
Granted, copyright reform is needed. But I think it's a mistake to put it in a different category from physical media without recognizing that 3d printers are on track to become household items.

My parents know what pirating is, but they aren't savvy or motivated enough to browse over to PirateBay, run uTorrent, PeerBlock, etc.
However, they ARE savvy enough to fire up YouTube, where they can find "infringing" videos that get around auto-detection by horizontal flipping, etc. etc. etc. The RIAA's and MPAA's of the world would love to point at them and the hordes of people like them and and say "pirates! Cough up $1000 for every song/video/whatever"!
In the meantime, I'm living in Thailand. Piracy is my default way of obtaining media. In many if not most cases, it would actually be very difficult or impossible to "legitimately" obtain said media. If that makes me an evil criminal, so be it. But I tend to think that it says much more about the distribution system being broken beyond repair and utterly antiquated than it says about the people like me. The real content creators need to stop listening to (and paying) the AA's crying over spilled milk and start looking for ways to embrace (and fund themselves via) the pervasive and un-policeable internet, which will be the way to distribute their creations. The cat is out of the bag, Pandora's box is opened, the internet isn't going anywhere and nobody will ever be able to stay a step ahead of the pirates.
Maybe 3D printers will become a household item within our lifetimes, but we're a long ways off from Star-Trek like replicators.

>> ^DrewNumberTwo:

99% of the people of the world are pirates? There's about one computer for every three people. My parents don't even know what pirating is. There are less than 10 billion people on Earth, not 50 billion. This guy's exaggeration makes it look like he just doesn't know what he's talking about.
Granted, copyright reform is needed. But I think it's a mistake to put it in a different category from physical media without recognizing that 3d printers are on track to become household items.


My parents know what pirating is, but they aren't savvy or motivated enough to browse over to PirateBay, run uTorrent, PeerBlock, etc.

However, they ARE savvy enough to fire up YouTube, where they can find "infringing" videos that get around auto-detection by horizontal flipping, etc. etc. etc. The RIAA's and MPAA's of the world would love to point at them and the hordes of people like them and and say "pirates! Cough up $1000 for every song/video/whatever"!

In the meantime, I'm living in Thailand. Piracy is my default way of obtaining media. In many if not most cases, it would actually be very difficult or impossible to "legitimately" obtain said media. If that makes me an evil criminal, so be it. But I tend to think that it says much more about the distribution system being broken beyond repair and utterly antiquated than it says about the people like me. The real content creators need to stop listening to (and paying) the *AA's crying over spilled milk and start looking for ways to embrace (and fund themselves via) the pervasive and un-policeable internet, which will be the way to distribute their creations. The cat is out of the bag, Pandora's box is opened, the internet isn't going anywhere and nobody will ever be able to stay a step ahead of the pirates.

Maybe 3D printers will become a household item within our lifetimes, but we're a long ways off from Star-Trek like replicators.

>> ^dag:

I tried to get into a couple of Hamilton books but they never clicked for me. The ones I tried seemed to have a weird mix of space opera (which I like) and the occult (not so much).

You're probably talking about the Night's Fall series -- yeah that was not so good. The premise was okay, but he introduced way too many characters, way too many settings, and it went on and on for well over 2,000 pages, and then has a crap ending.

His later works are better. Try Fallen Dragon or Pandora's Star. The former is a completely standalone book, the latter is an ongoing series (5 books in the universe so far, and I suspect more are on the way).

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Also, Children of the Sky was a little disappointing - though I wanted it to be great.>> ^dag:

I tried to get into a couple of Hamilton books but they never clicked for me. The ones I tried seemed to have a weird mix of space opera (which I like) and the occult (not so much).
Though, having just written that, I really do like Allistor Reynolds' books which are just that same kind of mix. go figure.
>> ^NetRunner:
I'm between books right now. My last was Peter F. Hamilton's The Evolutionary Void which is the third book in a trilogy, set in the same universe as Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained. It's not groundbreaking, but it's fun -- space opera stuff, will make a good movie someday.
Next in the queue will be Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Or possibly John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. Or maybe Vernor Vinge's Children of the Sky. They're all sitting on the table nearby, reminding me that I've been neglecting my dead tree media again...