>> ^demon_ix:
I'm still wondering if it would be ok to add an introduction to the bible.


The bible is public domain so it absolutely is.

I want to pass around a hundred thousand King James Bibles. Only I'd include a one page introduction to it that says:

Everything within this book is fictitious. It was written between 200 and 400 years after Jesus was alive.

And King James had the bible re-written in his image and barely a word of it mirrors the early texts.


But then again I doubt it would work, as the religious devout and 'actual history' rarely get along.

Wow! And to think, I was nearly permanently banned my first month here. I'd like to first thank kp for the fantastic write up, post, and pq organization. Next up, I'd like to thank the rest of y'all suave mofos, for watching, upvoting, and appreciating my twisted sense of humor. And finally, I'd like to thank myself. It wasn't as easy as I made it look, pinpointing the greatest underground rap videos (often foregoing the luxury of thumbnails), locating full episodes and movies (the internet is public domain, so far as I'm concerned), posting political videos that I disagreed with but refused to ignore (how many did I take from you, qm and billo?), and of course, the controversy. No, it wasn't easy but I, "endeavored to persevere."
I discovered VideoSift simply as way to post videos on myspace, interestingly enough. What I found, though, was a galaxy of videos, which have entertained, educated, appalled, and bored the fuck out of me through the year or so since I've discovered this joint. I've even turned some friends onto it, too, but most are still in their lurking-cocoons.
Yes, I've been controversial in the past, it's in my blood, you see? But I think the community, as a whole, is able to realize that I'm more of a civil-siftdisobedient than an outright siftarchist. I'm delighted to earn this meaningless achievement and, finally, receive the respect diamonds are usually entitled too. We have a great community here and I look forward to seeing and helping it excel. Thank you very much.

>> ^quantumushroom:
What's great about this is Obamalinsky is still hiding his real college papers.
If they weren't likely filled with the exact same anti-American, pro-commie sentiments as the fake, they'd already be public domain.
What's the fraudsident hiding?


What would it matter if they were public? it wouldnt matter if they were a long gigantic salute to the Reagan/bush doctrine to people like you because YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT FACTS ANYWAY. To people like Hannity, Beck,Limbaugh or O'Reilly, it costs nothing to make shit up and believe it yourself, only to be proven wrong by the facts, and then CONTINUE to believe in your made up shit. This quote by Limbaugh captures the essence of such attitude: Obama was indoctrinated in a Madrassa, he is a muslim, he was not born in the US, he is a communist, he wants to kill the elderly, he hates america and the constitution, he is a liar, and so on and so on, All of the above have again and again been shown to be false, yet you still parrot this bullshit as if it was obviously true. Its not fucking true. stop being such a fucking boneheaded moron, pull your head out of your ass, and READ THE FUCKING FACTS. Want to slam Obama for his policies, behaviour, ideology or ideas, fine, thats completely fair, but get the fucking facts straight, stop making shit up and check your facts, and even us liberals will listen to you, I promise.

What's great about this is Obamalinsky is still hiding his real college papers.

If they weren't likely filled with the exact same anti-American, pro-commie sentiments as the fake, they'd already be public domain.

What's the fraudsident hiding?

This film is public domain and it's here on this site if not mistaken-

Isn't the bible public domain?
It could be exploited as well.

Edit: OK, I just tried reading that 50 page intro. It was like getting smacked in the face with a "Stupid Stick" - I could not continue reading it...

Uggh, you are correct. Probably not public domain. Well, at least now you know it's on google
*Kill

I thought this was against the rules?

"Please do not post entire episodes of television shows or movies, unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt they are in the public domain. "

Tell me its true, its public domain?!

>> ^blankfist:We were talking about using public streets without a license and you somehow equated that to stealing from Walmart.

Right, not your private streets (which you can still use however you like), but streets held by the organization which represents the interests of the public as a whole, not your personal interests/preferences. You seem to think that you, and random video asshat, somehow, have veto power over the the property claims of organizations which you are a stakeholder in, but you have not explained why you should have such power.

There you go again with the "state owns the road" stuff.

Okay, I am apparently talking right past you on this. Consider, just for the sake of discussion, how your argument changes if you replace "the state" with "john's toll road network". Why should john have to let you do whatever the hell you want on his roads? he charges very little to use them, he just has a whole bunch of penalty clauses in the toll contract if you don't use them as agreed, and he never forced you to use them, how is he in the wrong here?

In fact, those sorts of comments are antithetical to liberalism.

Lib-speak, which I acknowledge is vaguely termed, was intended to be short for Libertarian-Speak.

None the less, it is only antithetical to either of these ideologies if you accept the fairytale notion that the state is not a corporation(an organization of individuals with property held wholly in common), which owns property and provides services, just like any other.

The government is supposed to be in service of the people, and therefore the people "own" the property.

Just as the shareholders of Walmart "own" the inventory, and the retail space, the same rights apply.

Therefore, the people should have absolute freedom to use the property without damaging it or hurting others.

Why should that sentence apply to the holdings of the state, and not the holdings of Walmart?

...if we determine the contract to be wrong in nature, then we're stealing?

Thats pretty much the definition, if I feel that Walmart's "you have to pay for that" policy is wrong in nature, and I decide to disregard it, then I am stealing.

This is ridiculous. It's "PUBLIC PROPERTY"! It shouldn't be seen as "PRIVATE STATE PROPERTY"!

Property is the right to use, abuse and deny access to an object or space. "PUBLIC PROPERTY" as you seem to mean it, is more like the public domain, which anybody may use for any purpose, such as the mythical English commons. Roads and building, and similar made and maintained things are, of necessity, owned by somebody. Sometimes that owner is the state, sometimes it's Walmart, in both cases you need the owners permission to use them.

I don't know exactly how all of that works out, so it would be difficult for me to render an opinion. If it's truly "private property" and not "public property" then I'd imagine the cops shouldn't have jurisdiction.

The turnpike police work for the turnpike, they hand out tickets which you agree to pay when you get on the turnpike (read the back of the toll pass), just like the gov roads, only it's run by a private entity. Would you object equally to this arrangement?

Please do not post entire episodes of television shows or movies, unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt they are in the public domain.

I think "in the public domain" here means that you won't face any legal trouble for posting it, which is true in this case and a lot of the documentaries that get sifted. I haven't ever seen a full movie, per se, but lots of feature-length documentaries.

Does it matter if this is snuff?

"4. Please do not post entire episodes of television shows or movies, unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt they are in the public domain."

Read the FAQ section:

Please do not post entire episodes of television shows or movies, unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt they are in the public domain.

That's what BitTorrent is for.

*discard

If this is public domain I'm going to re-edit it into a horror movie. Maybe I'll call it "curse of the warehouse".

Here's some info from a seminar I had to teach "years Ago" on web graphics. These are from my notes, so I know there may some holes in the descriptions.

This format was derived and released into public domain. There are no laws or governing bodies which control or define it's use. JPG can represent any number of RGB colors up to 16.7 million. JPG Uses HSL (Hue, Saturation, Luminescence) in its compression method.

How it compresses...

1). RGB values are converted to mathematical formulas by your computer.

2). Data reduction begins using a process called sub-sampling.
-the brightness information is left alone while 1/2 of the other 2 scales are eliminated.
-they are eliminated by replacing two neighboring pixels with a single value representing their average
-this cuts the image size down by 2/3 in size.
-this also leaves the brightness intact

3). The image is partitioned into 8 blocks, using "DCT" (Direct Cosign Transform) and "Quantization"
-the changes in brightness and colors are identified and rounded off.
-(3's are rounded to 5's and 75's may be rounded to 100's)

4). Now, once all the rounding off has been done, there are a lot more standard and identical settings and values
-this allows it to compress via a standard and unencumbered "Lostless" compression method.

The VAST majority of web sites and blogs are set up for permanent, unchangeable comments. Virtually all of them allow no comment editing whatsoever - no 24 hr grace period, no 24 second grace period. Once you hit 'enter' or click 'submit' your comment is there FOREVER. So we here at VS are lucky that we have 24 hrs to edit our comments. So I still don't see what the big deal is. If you're so scared of your words becoming permanent, then don't write them. No one is forcing you to comment.

I think publicly expressed comments of all types, whether they're blog comments, or words from an interview, or a speech, or a letter to the editor, etc., should become part of the public domain. Most of those already are. So choose your words carefully if you want to express your opinion.

NOW, I still believe we should be able to delete our video posts and blog posts whenever we want, even if we do it in a killing spree just like karaidl did. And here's the one and only reason I support that: If dag and lucky decided to sell this site to someone (for example, Digg, or Google, or (gulp) Disney) I would want the ability to nuke everything (except my comments) that I ever posted. I don't want my contributions here to help line the pockets of some asshole corporation in the future. Like I said, I'm willing to let my words enter the public domain, but I don't want some heartless conglomerate to make money on all the video posts that I took the time and effort to find and submit. I know it might sound silly that a big corporation would want to buy VideoSift, but I don't think it's impossible. So that's why I still want the option to kill my videos at will, without restrictions.

But to get back to the point, our current comment policy is just fine as it is.