The paper, produced by scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, found that when adjustments were made to compensate for inconsistent historical methods of measuring temperature, especially those involving seawater, the hiatus largely disappeared. Perfect sleek on-the-go vibrator.
Five vibration modes and five intensity levels. Could veteran defensive lineman return next season? San Francisco 49ers vs. The judge leading Beirut blast probe: Discreet and defiant. Green light for plan to build new wall at Limerick cemetery. Facebook invests billions in metaverse efforts as ad business slows. How you managed to comment on those posts without reading them is still a mystery that science has yet to answer. You combat piracy by giving people a reason to buy, offering goods and services that they want that are convenient and reasonably priced.
Basically everything the legacy industries can't seem to do. Yeah, those legacy industries with their crazy property rights and expectations that people would pay them for their valuable property. That's just crazy. How about if you selfish dickheads just stop taking other people's stuff without paying. Oh yeah, not an option for some of you. Look, if some people can make money by embracing piracy, then good for them. But it's silly and childish to just say that everyone should do that.
The pendulum is swinging the other way, and the internet-IP-free-for-all-heyday is going to swing the other way. You guys really and truly brought this on yourselves. Mike, what sort of "legitimate sites" do you think are going to have problems? If you are doing to say "rap blogs", well, they can still exist.
They just won't be able to stick pirated remixes on a file host and link to them, and act like they don't know what it is.
So perhaps they are bad actors after all, right? If you are going to day "user contributed content sites", I would say all they need to do is be able to know who is contributing the content, and to provide that information based on DMCA complaint or legal action, rather than being obstructionist or offering "anonymous" accounts to allow contributors to hide. Otherwise, perhaps they are just bad actors.
File lockers? Well, considering that they make their money by breaking larger, DVD sizes files into multiple pieces, and then severely limiting download abilities unless a user pays for a membership to "download the files", knowing full well that most of the content in these files are DVD rips, well, perhaps they are just bad actors.
So, can you please give me some examples of truly above board sites that would be hurt? Please expand your mind to allow for reality and not just blindly accept the theory that ANY company, or legislation, can solve the piracy issue you claim is robbing the industry of more money than the GDP of the US, annually!
Ron, I don't except anything blindly, nor do I think this will "solve the piracy issue". Like anything, it will be a process, over time, not some sudden "swoosh". From my viewpoint, this will not advance the progress of combating piracy.
What it will advance is the technology to avoid the legislation. Iran just banned VPNs, Pakistan already has done so. Look for similar situations to occur around the globe as the "process, over time" tries to figure out what to ban next. Meanwhile script kiddies everywhere are three, four, five steps ahead of this enormous game of whack a mole that simply won't ever be "won", nor will any of these actions ever lead to a single cent of additional profit for the industries who sink millions into campaign contributions and other lobbying efforts to enact said laws.
The only people benefiting are the attorneys and the Congressman who are swayed by kickbacks and contributions. No actor, producer, gaffer, make up artist, production crew member, etc. Remember, even the 14th highest grossing movie ever LOST money. This shell game in the name of piracy is a con game being run on Congress who are kept happy to keep the status quo.
It is simply an enormous waste of resources that benefits a handful of people who are getting paid to go through the motions since the net result will NOT be additional income for any studio or person in the content industry from the bottom up.
It's no different than the child at the beach trying to stop the ocean with a sand wall. You could use every grain on the beach to build your wall, the next morning, the beach will be relatively flat again. The day after that you won't even know a wall was built.
It's an exercise in futility, carry on but don't expect those with an ounce of common sense to agree with your actions or abide by them even.
I would say all they need to do is be able to know who is contributing the content, and to provide that information based on DMCA complaint or legal action, rather than being obstructionist or offering "anonymous" accounts to allow contributors to hide.
Says the Anonymous Coward. You're cool with being anonymous here though, right? Anonymity is only for "honest" people or something? And a new, rather sweeping piece of legislation would never be used to start chipping away at anonymity online, whether it's at a so-called "rogue" site or maybe just some site that the government or its connected industries just don't care for. Maybe some anonymous account is linking to articles that show Business A in a bad light.
Or telling people how to email-bomb customer service because of an ignored issue. Or simply ranting about a poor quality product or service.
And just like that, someone exercising their free speech has just had their personal info turned over to the offended business under some other pretense.
But, no, that's cool. Anonymity should be done away with. It's obviously turned the internet into a den of thieves and whatever. Capitalist Lion Fucker , 28 Oct am. You know, the funniest part is if I put a name up top, you would not make that claim. Feel better? It really doesn't matter here because I am not adding anything other than my own words. I am not uploading a file for sharing, or anything like that.
The rest of your post is a paranoid rant. Anonymous won't be gotten rid of for places like this - it should be however trashed when it comes to adding content to a site.
The site owner should always know who is adding to the site, track them, and be willing to give that information to any reasonable legal action WITHOUT objection. So text isn't content? Capitalist Lion Tamer profile , 28 Oct pm.
I'd still make that claim. The lead-in sentence just wouldn't "pop" as much. I have a named account but I don't spend my time decrying the anonymity of others. We'll see. I see a lot of stuff happening already that I would have called myself "paranoid" for envisioning 10 years ago. Anonymous won't be gotten rid of for places like this It's already gone. ICE will move on an IP address and those are collected with every comment, whether you sign a name to it or not.
If someone wants that info, it's already available. I'm cool with that if the site owner states that up front. I would imagine incoming traffic will decrease immensely. CLF You fuck lions?
You're one up on me, dude. I just tame them. I call them "land sea lions. Prohibition did kick them in the balls. It made them go deep underground, and it was more difficult to profit while breaking the law.
Kind of like what this will do to pirates. Of course piracy will still exist, but it will be further marginalized. The heyday is over. Wiggs profile , 27 Oct pm.
Which is why alcohol is not sold anywhere in the US to this very d Wait, what? Well consarnit! I was all ready to head down to the local speakeasy this weekend. Pay attention. What was a wild free for all before prohibition was turned into a highly regulated industry, with few who operate outside of the law anymore.
When you look at it overall, the government succeeded very well in bringing order and regulation to an industry that had a wild west mentality before that. Welcome to the future. It is somewhat more regulated, for your safety and enjoyment. And that highly regulated industry has never had any issues with their anti-consumer behavior, right? So we are all safe from any dangerous effects of alcohol? Got it! Glad those guys in DC are on top of that!
Prohibition has one enduring side effect. The American Mafia. From Wikipedia: "Mafia activities were restricted until , when they exploded because of the introduction of Prohibition. Victorious factions would go on to dominate organized crime in their respective cities, setting up the family structure of each city.
Despite alcohol production and consumption being made illegal, there was still a high demand for it from the public. This created an atmosphere that tolerated crime as a means to provide liquor to the public, even amongst the police and city politicians.
The high demand and consumption made bootlegging the most lucrative crime and turned local criminal gangs into large crime syndicates. While illegal stills were used to make alcohol, most of the country's illegal alcohol was imported from Canada. Our current prohibition repeats this: the cartels exist primarily because of idiotic US drug policies. Nancy Reagan is probably a patron saint to the Mexican and Colombian drug lords.
But the profits skyrocketed. Nothing makes something more profitable for the purveyors than having it outlawed. See also: The Drug War.
So, piracy may be "marginalized. That'll show 'em! Prohibition made it possible to profit, massively, by breaking the law. It did not make it harder to profit while breaking the law. Rather it took law abiding citizens and turned them into potential criminals overnight. The same will happen here. This will move underground, harming many legitimate businesses and people, and 'piracy' will still happen.
I see no evidence of Mike whining, but I do see plenty of evidence of you whining about Mike's position on this bill. It's just that your whining has assumed the form of insults and overconfident assertions.
Mike42 profile , 27 Oct am. Understand it? What makes you think he's even READ it? These guys just push whatever the industry lobbyists hand them Hollywood exec: We are making this movie. Hollywood accountant: Studie show we will loose money on this film. Hollywood accountant: I'm telling you we will lose money. Hollywood exec: NO we will not. Hollywood accountant: How? Hollywood exec: We Will sue people who don't watch it.
Hollywood accountant: You can't do that. Hollywood exec: Then I will buy some politicians to make new laws. Hollywood accountant: Oh OK, you can do that.
Let's green light this puppy. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it. I have this amusing mental image of Mike, with his bizarre left bangs only haircut, in his prison inmate shirt, frothing at the mouth and rapidly trying to play "pin the tail on the donkey" over all of this.
As you sow, you shall reap. You sowed like crazy, now you can enjoy the harvest of fine laws. Ultimately, none of the three suspects ever faced charges. Houck and David E. Skip to content Lamar Smith.
Do you find this information helpful? A small donation would help us keep this accessible to all. Forego a bottle of soda and donate its cost to us for the information you just learned, and feel good about helping to make it available to everyone!
0コメント