The purpose of copyright law is to promote the arts and useful sciences according to the constitution which grants Congress the authority to create that class of law.
One microsecond after I'm dead, there is no span of time you can give me a monopoly on my works that will entice me to create another work.
You could make an argument that investors in my work should get a chance to recoup their investment for some time, but a fixed time should be able to accomplish that. Give someone 35 years to make back their investment, and if the person dies they can pass it onto someone else.
What's happening instead is that this absurd length of monopoly is meaning that works are being erased from history because the copyright length is so long there's no way most works are maintained that long despite having no commercial value. That's the opposite of the stated goal. You can make an argument that something without commercial value isn't valuable and it doesn't matter if it was destroyed, but we have examples where something that was allowed to enter the public domain back when that was possible became valuable after the public discovered it and started to make use of it.
I put my money where my mouth is, and the graysonian ethic has something written into the legal page that releases it into the public domain 15 years after first publishing.
One microsecond after I'm dead, there is no span of time you can give me a monopoly on my works that will entice me to create another work.
You could make an argument that investors in my work should get a chance to recoup their investment for some time, but a fixed time should be able to accomplish that. Give someone 35 years to make back their investment, and if the person dies they can pass it onto someone else.
What's happening instead is that this absurd length of monopoly is meaning that works are being erased from history because the copyright length is so long there's no way most works are maintained that long despite having no commercial value. That's the opposite of the stated goal. You can make an argument that something without commercial value isn't valuable and it doesn't matter if it was destroyed, but we have examples where something that was allowed to enter the public domain back when that was possible became valuable after the public discovered it and started to make use of it.
I put my money where my mouth is, and the graysonian ethic has something written into the legal page that releases it into the public domain 15 years after first publishing.
"my theychild's first words were 'birthing person, please chop off my downstairs lockup'"
I tend to agree with this, but a lot of people start to point fingers at one political party or another when in reality it's a cultural decline involving both the people and the parties.
The danger isn't one party or another, it isn't left or right, it's governments utilizing overwhelming power in violation of basic human rights in pursuit of even more overwhelming power. It doesn't matter who does it, they're wrong.
The danger isn't one party or another, it isn't left or right, it's governments utilizing overwhelming power in violation of basic human rights in pursuit of even more overwhelming power. It doesn't matter who does it, they're wrong.
Normally I disagree with your posts on politics, but that guy is a total scumbag and deserves everything he gets.
Shame there couldn't be more consequences for being lying corrupt scumbags in politics. Hell, maybe even start holding the political parties accountable when egregious cases like this occur. After all, it isn't like the Republicans ever actually kicked him out. "A win's a win! Just like Stanos claims he said when he walked on the moon with Neil Armstrong!"
Shame there couldn't be more consequences for being lying corrupt scumbags in politics. Hell, maybe even start holding the political parties accountable when egregious cases like this occur. After all, it isn't like the Republicans ever actually kicked him out. "A win's a win! Just like Stanos claims he said when he walked on the moon with Neil Armstrong!"
Ironically, all they needed to do was STFU. Just stay out of culture war bullshit altogether. Hey everyone, don't you love watered down beer? Then Bud Light is for you! Everyone with no taste in beer can get behind that!
It's bad therefore it's unpopular.
My argument has been consistently that if we're going to use supposedly cheap green energy, it needs to actually be cheap and not just "well he said it's cheap". My proposal on that has been stuff like hydroelectric (and Canada has lots of hydroelectric), so people want to use the electric instead of dealing with the pain in the ass of fossil fuels for home use.
And if we're going to use electric vehicles, then they need to have a value proposition that isn't just "it's not as good as a shitbox from 20 years ago but it is a lot more expensive and you'll feel morally righteous". My proposal for that value proposition has been to go smaller and cheaper and more limited.
My argument has been consistently that if we're going to use supposedly cheap green energy, it needs to actually be cheap and not just "well he said it's cheap". My proposal on that has been stuff like hydroelectric (and Canada has lots of hydroelectric), so people want to use the electric instead of dealing with the pain in the ass of fossil fuels for home use.
And if we're going to use electric vehicles, then they need to have a value proposition that isn't just "it's not as good as a shitbox from 20 years ago but it is a lot more expensive and you'll feel morally righteous". My proposal for that value proposition has been to go smaller and cheaper and more limited.
>but they barely ever managed to hit their target inflation of 2% per year.
I've got a bridge to sell you.
Got it -- I won't waste my time trying to deprogram someone who clearly doesn't care about being lied to if it's by a bureaucrat.
I've got a bridge to sell you.
Got it -- I won't waste my time trying to deprogram someone who clearly doesn't care about being lied to if it's by a bureaucrat.
That's a good point. As an example, the western worldview is that the world is ultimately a knowable, understandable, quantifiable thing. Under many worldviews, the world is something transient that can change at any moment into a fundamentally different thing on the whims of an alien, unknowable metaphysic, so it's a waste of time understanding the world.
As an example, the Arab muslims were some of the peak scientists of the short era they agreed with Christians that the world was the work of God and you could learn more about God by learning more about the world, but their fundamental ideology changed after a while to believe the world is made by God and can be changed at any time by God so learning about it is a waste.
As an example, the Arab muslims were some of the peak scientists of the short era they agreed with Christians that the world was the work of God and you could learn more about God by learning more about the world, but their fundamental ideology changed after a while to believe the world is made by God and can be changed at any time by God so learning about it is a waste.
😮
Yeah, that's a good example. "Oh, so you don't presuppose that you're alive, that you're on earth, that your perceptions of reality through your eyes and ears are accurate enough that you can make judgements based on those? That your mind is clear enough that you can use it to make judgements?"
Doesn't seem like a lot, but just the above isn't stuff you can just take for granted necessarily. If any of those presuppositions are wrong then you can't move forward with any conclusions!
Yeah, that's a good example. "Oh, so you don't presuppose that you're alive, that you're on earth, that your perceptions of reality through your eyes and ears are accurate enough that you can make judgements based on those? That your mind is clear enough that you can use it to make judgements?"
Doesn't seem like a lot, but just the above isn't stuff you can just take for granted necessarily. If any of those presuppositions are wrong then you can't move forward with any conclusions!
I like to think that I want to see opinions I disagree with, and I'm mutuals with people who I think prove that out. People I respect but nonetheless disagree with strongly on important things.
Thing is, opinions I disagree with need to have some grounding in reality, or it's just slamming my head against a brick wall! I'm not a teenager anymore, I don't want to just argue with people who are wrong on the Internet.
At least *try* to change my mind rather than just assuming you've already captured it and saying stuff that's divorced from reality, logic, and common sense, you know?
Thing is, opinions I disagree with need to have some grounding in reality, or it's just slamming my head against a brick wall! I'm not a teenager anymore, I don't want to just argue with people who are wrong on the Internet.
At least *try* to change my mind rather than just assuming you've already captured it and saying stuff that's divorced from reality, logic, and common sense, you know?
The economy keeps crashing over and over again after they promise it won't happen again. And quality of life keeps getting worse for the common man while it keeps getting better for the richest of the rich.
It should be a base assumption that even if we can't agree on what a better system looks like, the current system doesn't accomplish anything it claims to attempt. At best, it makes numbers look good so they can stab us in the back and tell us it's healthy to feel that sharp pain.
It should be a base assumption that even if we can't agree on what a better system looks like, the current system doesn't accomplish anything it claims to attempt. At best, it makes numbers look good so they can stab us in the back and tell us it's healthy to feel that sharp pain.
We've got our eye on you and your Rock and Roll music and blue jeans and comic books and talkie movies and...