There's just a few small problems here....they want world-wide availability of broadband. Global leaders also want money/power.... Pissing off the world population doesn't achieve either objective...it will, however, eventually cause mass chaos and retalliation against governments. There are too many people for any government body to fully control...and not enough military to regain control if a world-wide revolution were to occur. If you look back in history...in every instance (as was posted earlier in the thread), when a government has gotten too big or too arrogant...it has fallen. Instead of learning from history, world leaders are working on repeating it....on a global scale.
Wow, this thing has totally derailed, ignoring that it could be some Anti-US propoganda, or even scare tactics, some of you have lost the plot. Whats with the middle east would send a missile towards the US crap? I can just see it, "Allah!!! those American infidels have cut of your net for downloading Ugly Betty via BitTorrent, shall i launch the nukes?"
Will a passed ACTA shutdown youtube? At first I was just going to post only 'bollocks to that.' But then I realized I would need to pay royalties to sex pistols. Intellectual property is meant to be vague on purpose. By definition its property of imagination, nothing with substance or form. Let's say you wanted to create a youtube video of family guy. What would be infringement? One two-minute clip you wanted to share with a friend? Using an audio clip for a fan-made project? Audio is composed of multiple layers of encoding. If you use video & add your own audio - does it matter if its only five seconds? Does it need to one entire episode or one entire season? Would it matter if you add so many special effects you can't tell it was from family guy? Or even just being a simple disk jockey who does the same thing with audio instead of video. The answer? It doesn't matter. Why? Because Intellectual Property is meant to be vague on purpose. Conglomerates of lawyers can freely pick and choose just about any living person for violation of ip rights. Ultimately, when you look at something, the light bouncing off its surface (a copy) enter your retinas. Impulses (a copy) in your receptor cells and travel down nerve fibers to other cells. (Copy) then end up bouncing around your brain. (Multiple copies.) Legal precedents for the argument of "unauthorized copies" has already been created. Therefor these precedents will eventually lead to convictions for "unauthorized copies" in your mind. (aka "illegal thoughts.") It should be pretty simple to understand why placing value on imagination. Then private companies enforcing the exchange of said value in any court system is insane.
What is wrong with socialism ? 100% capitalism doesn't work due to corruption, and 100% socialism doesn't work due to corruption. What you need is a mix of the two, and thats where US is heading aswell, wich I think will benefit more then it hurts, wich is democracy at work. EU is beckoming a state more and more that is true, and it has its ups and downs, just like any other large nation with many diffrent cultures and people within its borders. The reason to why EU ruled that MS had to remove I.E and wanted them to remove more programs was that MS where not, according to European law, competing fairly and used the OS to monopolize on side features such as webprograms, email and so forth. I see where it is comming from, and I would be pissed off if I where some 3rd party developer beeing shut out of business like that. On the other hand I would be pissed off if I where beeing penalized for my strong business position/monopoly. Depends how you look at things. Havn't read the treaty yet and probably won't since there is no way to police the internet, it wasn't designed that way. One short example would be websites like syfy and HULU, they try to protect their regional material the best they can, but still there are numerous of programs that will let you penetrate their "defence" and view all material unrestricted of regional location. For every hinder they put up 10 ways of passing it will come up. The generations growing up now from the 90s and up have no concept of paying for music, or entertainment and most people born in the 80s have the same notion; so trying to police this 'internet' back into the box is a pointless waste of effort on any nations behalf. The internet is going nowhere and the people who loose money b/c of the internet needs to change their business model. I mean there is this hilerious anti piracy comercial with Gov Arnold riding a motorbike together with Jackie Chan advocating against piracy while riding through explosions, talking of how much money the business loose etc with various clips with overpaid actors and whatnot. The whole point of the video was to make us feel sorry for the actors and therfore not pirate, I mean c'mon? People pirate b/c things cost too much, it is too much garbadge floating around, global releases takes too long and people are more or less fed up with buying the pig in a sack. I'm done paying fullprice for crappy unforfilling products that I regret buying. I DL then if I like it or intend to use it, I buy the product. Thats what the industry is afraid of, they can no longer sell the pig in the sack.
this is an interesting read upto the world VS america. Please cut the crap of my countries better than yours before it gets closed like they all do.
Yah excessive flagwaving is kinda 1997, all countries have good and bad, and often alot of good comes with a slice of bad and vise verse. People have diffrent systems for everything, and diffrent systems work in diffrent places. But it is interesting why Americans get all wierd when you mention socialism. Socialism and communism isn't the same thing, and communism in its core essence isn't a terrible idea either, but it simply doesn't work.
Here's the biggest issue I have with the EU's ruling....and though it won't make any sense to most, it does in fact make sense from a true enthusiast standpoint. The EU fined MS for including Media Player, IE, and a few other apps claiming that it's anti-competitive. Look at Apple though....They include Safari (by default, which is the same as MS did with IE), they force you to use Safari to download any other OSX compatible browser. Apple requires you to purchase an "Apple" computer to use their OS...which to me, is anti-competitive. They brag about their "stability"...but you're required to buy an "Apple computer" to use OSX. MS at least gives us the ability to build "custom" systems for Windows to run on. Apple keeps releasing updates to block Palm Pre from syncing with itunes....again, anti-competitive. You're required to sign up for AT&T (in the US anyway) if you want an iPhone (anti-competitive much?). Apple takes every step necessary to control, or even eliminate competition....the same thing MS keeps getting fined for. The governments, which are supposed to act within the best interest of it's citizens, have taken no action against Apple even though it would be in the best interest of the citizen's to do so.....same as going after MS was in the past. The governments are no longer worried about serving the people....they're more interested in making the people, serve them...
Well I don't really see what your saying here, but they been after MS for many years, and they are probably as hard to win vs in court as Intel are. EU courts acted on complaints and then investigated it and found that by EU legislation MS where using their strong position on the OS market to monopolize side features. This is true, that is what they are doing and apple is doing the same thing more or less. Now you can debate wether this is good for the citizens or not, but free competition is always what you wanna strive for - and in this case free competition might not serve MS and Apples customers ( though I would want to think it does ) but it serves the 3rd party developers wich are also citizens within EU and therfore might benefit for the ruling and may THEN serve MS customers aswell with their OS specific solutions. Personally I don't use that many "core" sidefeatures so I don't really care, but I can see smaller companys wanting in on that market and beeing indirectly shutout of the business by monopolizing can't be considered fair play. Btw isn't ATnT some isp? Not sure what your point where there but in Europe you can buy an iphone and put whatever you want on it, apples doesn't shut out other makers of mobileOSs or interfears/sideprograms etc :x? Guess I missunderstood you, since makes no sense to me
In the US, AT&T is a mobile phone service provider, long distance phone service carrier and ISP. To get an iPhone, you have to sign up for AT&T's mobile phone service. You can only use apps on the phone, that are approved by Apple. Apple, at least in the US, wants complete control over the iPhone....just like they want complete control over iTunes users, which is why they keep releasing patches to prevent anything but iPods from syncing with iTunes.
If ever there were a government truly afraid of it's people it was but a brief sideshow in the context of history. I think history shows that the vast majority of even the best meaning governments become overbearing.
If this is all true, it'll be way worse than communism. **** Obama, he can piss right off now. I didn't ever wanna say this, but if this is true, we'd have been better off with Bush. Yes, saying that makes me cry inside.
Sometimes I wish obama would just go die in a hole tbh. Bush may have tried but he didnt actually do it, so I dont dislike him for it. If obama succeeds... well then I will have a problem with that. Oh wait, I already do.
Sometimes i get the feeling every time Obama does something people don't like, it give closet racists the fuel to talk crap.
And I'm convinced people who talk like that are closet trolls. Do you know how frustrating it is to have legitimate concerns and be branded as a racist and ignored? It's frustrating on this end, and childish on your's.
And this is why political threads get closed. Discuss the topic without insulting eachother and the thread stays open, why is that so difficult?
People wishing that Obama would die in a hole is a legitimate concern is it?? And there has been a few like that. You doing that selective reading again?
Regardless, shouldn't mark them as a racist. I know many several people that wish Bush would die in a hole--doesn't make them racist towards white people.
Doesn't make them not either. Anyone wanting someone to die for the sake of their net getting cut off is a little special needs though.
