Are they heroes or scumbags?

[baldgye]

drug dealers and child molesters have maximum security? wow. hope they are at least in the same boat with your violent gangsters.

Sweden is that type of country which is so humane, maximum security prison is like paradise for African refugees. He's probably getting full wifi internet access, spas, lobster dinners, massage machines, and more. About the only thing he isn't getting, is out.

Isn't the point of prison to try and rehabilitate criminals to be able live with the rest of us? And if not to separate them from the rest of society so they can do no more harm?

[fohat.digs]

I am a firm believer in capital punishment although not for the "punishment" aspect of it.

Minor criminals can and should be rehabilitated and retrained to take their place in society.

However, I also think that the human population of the world is an order of magnitude greater than it should be, so, far from believing that "all life is sacred" I think that we should make great efforts to limit growth and cull out the diseased portion.

If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.

The "punishment" aspect is just to call attention to and warn would-be future offenders.

[baldgye]

If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.

And if that organism simply killed everything it didn't understand on sight, soon as a more complicated illness came up it would fall apart and kill its self.

Capital punishment is perhaps the most short sighted sentence you could hope to give. Understanding what makes murders, rapists and other horrible people what they are, is the key to solving those problems, if you refuse or fail to do so, your no better than the murders, rapists etc....

[berserkfan]

If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.

And if that organism simply killed everything it didn't understand on sight, soon as a more complicated illness came up it would fall apart and kill its self.

Capital punishment is perhaps the most short sighted sentence you could hope to give. Understanding what makes murders, rapists and other horrible people what they are, is the key to solving those problems, if you refuse or fail to do so, your no better than the murders, rapists etc....

I am a firm believer in capital punishment although not for the "punishment" aspect of it.

Minor criminals can and should be rehabilitated and retrained to take their place in society.

However, I also think that the human population of the world is an order of magnitude greater than it should be, so, far from believing that "all life is sacred" I think that we should make great efforts to limit growth and cull out the diseased portion.

If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.

The "punishment" aspect is just to call attention to and warn would-be future offenders.

There is a big generation gap here, Fohat. And I am closer in age to you than baldgye which is why I agree with you much more.

In any case my empathy is always with the victims and not the perpetuators/ victimizers.

[baldgye]

...How old are you then? And how old am I?

[paicrai]

WE HAD FUN

[iri]

NOW PROCEED TO KILL PAICRAI

[Krogenar]

I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks?  ) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?

At some point we'll be in a media-free state; no discs, tapes, nothing -- it'll all be rights management. Companies will manage who has paid for the right to watch a particular film, video, etc. -- and consumers will just confirm they have the right, and enjoy the media, from anywhere. And the purchasing of those rights will be so small that stealing (that's what it is folks) just won't seem worth the energy.

This is the same way iTunes cut down on pirating of music. Sure, you can still hunt down the song you want and pirate it, but why -- it's so cheap it hardly seems worth the effort.

[davkol]

This is the same way iTunes cut down on pirating of music. Sure, you can still hunt down the song you want and pirate it, but why -- it's so cheap it hardly seems worth the effort.

Meanwhile, Bruce ****inson says Apple has killed music sales… and proceeds to talk about how it doesn't matter.

[baldgye]

I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks?  ) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?

inorite?

[HoffmanMyster]

I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks?  ) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?

inorite?

I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.

I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.).  And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy. 
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions? 

I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well.  ) 

[Krogenar]

I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks?  ) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?

inorite?

I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.

I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.).  And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy. 
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions? 

I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well.  )

I recall an African-American comedian who told a joke right after the L.A. Rights. He starts out by moving his arms frantically in front of him, chanting, "NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!" Then he pauses, and with a confused, slightly annoyed look on his face says, "... NO MEDIUMS? Small, large, XL.... no mediums? WTF?"

It's not about 'justice' - it's about taking things that aren't yours. When someone sees a Clack but doesn't like the price tag, or having to take their chances in a lottery, and buys (or makes) a fake Clack, they're stealing from someone else. That's no different from stealing movies or music. The only difference is who gets hurt.

As for whether there are two different groups at GH who hold these two different attitudes -- there's an easy way to find out. If all the people who supported PirateBay are willing to say that they also support the manufacturing of fake Clacks, then we have our answer. So sound off guys -- who supports fake Clacks?

And to be honest -- I'm not claiming to be a saint in this area. But I'm not waving a red flag saying I do it for 'justice' or some nonsense, either. The 'social justice' crap is just draped over it to make it sound more 'respectable'.

[baldgye]

I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks?  ) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?

inorite?

I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.

I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.).  And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy. 
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions? 

I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well.  ) 

In the context of this thread;
The way I see it is that stealing is stealing... it dsn't really matter who you steal from. It was something that I learn't as a teenager growing up with the ever increasing and varied number of p2p clients and then torrent sites/clients.
With piracy it all comes down to morals I think, if you don't want to pay the multi-national company for X then stealing it only tells them that your a group of people they need to shut down to FORCE you to pay, but if you simply don't buy X then what your telling them is that they need to change X or offer it in a different way. It's why the iTunes store has dominated and has so much power now.

But I'm with you in that people can have conflicting opinions with both of those opinions still being valid.


I too feel that taxes (for example) should be proportional to your earnings, becasue I'm of the opinion that greed is one of the great evils of our society. The fact that 1% of our global population has 50% of the wealth, yet millions of people still live in poverty is pretty awful and taxation is one of the only ways in which governments can hope to re-balance that wealth.

When it comes to IP and who owns what I think you have to judge that for what it is, an item, a 'thing'. It's pretty bizarre to suddenly start to rationalise stealing based on who made it. If you have a problem with the people who made something, and it's origins and supporting that with your money, you just shouldn't consume it at all.


I hope some of that makes sense, being pretty dyslexic I find it pretty difficult to convey **** like this in text in a way that any human would hope to follow lol



And ofc I would reply! This is suppose to be a 'forum'!

[davkol]

Autorship and monopoly on copying are two completely different things.

[iri]

rich ****s should definitely pay more. the problem is, since 2015 i will be in the category of rich ****s myself, according to russian laws. but in 2015 i will be living in another country. CHECKMATE, GOVERNMENT!