In light of recent political developments it has become clear that Hollywood and the music industry, or more specifically the RIAA and MPAA, have become a threat to our freedom whose continued existence can no longer be safely permitted.
How do I propose that this threat be eliminated? By collapsing the market for their services through the large scale, widespread production and distribution of Kopyleft materials (in an easily redistributable format whenever possible). Obviously, I cannot accomplish this by myself, and so I am calling upon all of you to write, record, and freely distribute your own songs and films.
I understand that many of you will state that you are already doing this, through YouTube, and that is an admirable start, but sadly this is no longer sufficient and is, furthermore, in danger of ceasing to remain an option should bills such as SOPA, PIPA, or others which may arise as their spiritual successors be passed (and be warned that even if the immediate threat is shot down the greater threat from the RIAA and MPAA will remain). While you should continue to post videos to YouTube and songs to music sharing sites you should also make an effort to distribute them through mediums which are more easily copied and redistributed as we as more secure against tampering and government intrusion. Copy your songs and videos to a DVD or flash drive and have tour friends pass it around between them and copy the content to their own drives, to be further copied and distributed to others in their lives whom you may not know personally.
You can also help more directly by boycotting the latest mainstream movies and by not buying firsthand CDs or DVDs or downloadable music from major labels or studios, only secondhand stuff, as this is legal, but does not profit the publisher. Instead, try to patronize local musicians, minor labels, and independent artists and filmmakers whenever possible. You should also try to patronize artists who sell their music directly to the consumer.
Furthermore, if you must patronize mainstream media, and it is almost impossible to avoid doing so entirely, try to give preference to films and bands with at least one actor, director, band member, or the like who has publicly expressed opposition to SOPA and/or PIPA
Do not, however, I repeat DO NOT destroy any mainstream media you already possess. While powerful as a symbolic gesture, doing so would open the possibility of you purchasing new copies of the destroyed media if you have a change of heart, which is directly counter to what we want to happen; Furthermore, any mainstream media which you desire to get rid of anyway should be resold or given away to help prevent firsthand sales. (Conversely, when dealing with the occasional artist who still has integrity, it would be nice if you encouraged your friends to buy their own copies even if you're no longer using yours)
Please help spread this message. Explain it to your friends and family and/or copy it to other forums. Spread the word. To preserve our freedom, Hollywood (and the music industry) must be destroyed.
EDIT: Added lines calling for people to patronize independent artists (bolded text)
EDIT: Added lines supporting actors, musicians, etc. who publicly oppose SOPA, even if they work for a mainstream company (italicized text)
EDIT: Corrected some ambiguous text that formerly seemed to be promoting illegal activity (underlined text)
Please explain how hollywood and the music industry are a threat to our freedoms?
Also even though i amenable to making some music for free distribution the fact remains that i do actually like making money off of music when i can. So i dont see myself getting on board with this since i disagree with it.
They're the ones supporting things like SOPA and PIPA
Kid,
Megamergers are a threat to our freedom. Shared monopolies are a thread to our freedom. The electoral college is a threat to our freedom. Multinational corporations are a threat to our freedom. Lobbyists are a threat to our freedom. The Senate is a threat to our freedom.
"Hollywood" would not be a threat to our freedom without these other factors. "Hollywood" would just be a place where a lot of show business happens.
Get your facts straight so you can recognize your real enemy.
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 10:19:19 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 18, 2012, 10:17:10 PM
They're the ones supporting things like SOPA and PIPA
Who are "they"?
The film industry, the music industry and the other related industries who are prone to overreacting to piracy.
So how is me not accepting payment for probably the only job that i would enjoy doing for the rest of my life going to accomplish help me be more free?
Also i gotta ask because i wonder every time youve posted something lately. And maybe its not fair to ask but its bugging me. How old are you?
You should replace "Hollywood" with "RIAA and MPAA" if that's what you're getting at.
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on January 18, 2012, 10:31:45 PM
You should replace "Hollywood" with "RIAA and MPAA" if that's what you're getting at.
That's probably a good idea
The thing is, that the only thing I can think of that has even a slight chance of weakening them is to weaken their parent industries.
Their arguments in favor of anti-piracy measures is that piracy is killing them, but I say that if this is what they propose to save themselves, then let them die; they are less important than the freedom of the internet.
On the other hand, the NSA is developing cyber-warfare centres across the USA with a large enough capacity to store half of all the information on the internet, Facebook already has 1800 pages worth of information on you and Google are letting the government read your emails via a purpose built backdoor.
People getting all worked up about SOPA from a civil liberties POV are missing the point: that ship already sailed. Total Information Awareness has been the name of the game since 2003. Wake up and smell the retroactive FISA immunity bill. They're spying on the Quakers, so they're sure as fuck spying on you. If you're worried about this being used to squash internal dissent, you're missing the fact the President can just send a a Predator drone or JSOC hitsquad around your place to blow your brains out - all perfectly legally.
I'm all for kicking megacorps in the teeth and pissing on their wheaties, but lets not build this up into anything it's not.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 18, 2012, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 18, 2012, 10:19:19 PM
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 18, 2012, 10:17:10 PM
They're the ones supporting things like SOPA and PIPA
Who are "they"?
The film industry, the music industry and the other related industries who are prone to overreacting to piracy.
Who is "the film industry" and "the music industry"?
If you don't know your enemies, how can you hope to defeat them?
By the way, entertainment industry profits are way up. Piracy isn't hurting their bottom line.
Quote from: Queen_Gogira on January 18, 2012, 10:31:45 PM
You should replace "Hollywood" with "RIAA and MPAA" if that's what you're getting at.
Gonna have to get more specific than that. Who funds the RIAA?
Cain: For that matter, a lot of the shit people are worried about can already be accomplished under the DMCA, which has been abused again and again since it was passed. SOPA/PIPA just eliminate the tiny bit of due process that currently exists, but if a dog's already bitten me twice, I'm not going to just stand there and let him bite me a third time if I can help it.
As to the OP: Are you in a shitty band? Because the "everybody should stop trying to make money from their art" and "everybody should stop supporting people who make money from their art," when combined, sounds a lot like "I can't make money from my art." Well, either that or "I'm financially comfortable that I don't have to worry about supporting myself," which unfortunately most people (particularly artists who are not already working for "the system") are not.
What kingyak said. Either that or that you dont want to pay for entertainment. Someone still has to create that entertainment and they have the right to be compensated for that work. Being in a band is fun but its also hard work. If my band palys a show in the middle of winter and we have to lug our amps and drums in the cold from the practice space to the van the van to the stage the stage to the van and then the van to the practice space and we dont get paid were going to be annoyed. We did a show in central massachusetts and didnt even get enough to cover gas because the show wasnt well promoted and there were only like ten people there and the money had to be split between four bands. So were never playing that venue again. Because that sort of bullshit sucks when youre a self funded band.
Give us some copyleft resources! we'll play with them
Question - is youtube part of the bad guys?
Quote from: Cramulus on January 19, 2012, 12:34:06 AM
Give us some copyleft resources! we'll play with them
Question - is youtube part of the bad guys?
Dammit, Cramulus, pay attention!
1. Give thumb drives to five people, who in turn give thumb drives to five people, who then give thumb drives to five people*
2. ?????????
3. HOLLYWOOD DESTROYED!
*If you do not give your thumb drives to five people by May 23, your cock will explode. Bill Troutman of Buzzard's Breath, New Mexico didn't pass on his thumb drives an now HE HAS NO PENIS!
:lol:
B-B-B- I'VE ONLY GOT TWO THUMBS!
/
:cramstipated:
That could be problematic for your penis.
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 12:39:46 AM
Quote from: Cramulus on January 19, 2012, 12:34:06 AM
Give us some copyleft resources! we'll play with them
Question - is youtube part of the bad guys?
Dammit, Cramulus, pay attention!
1. Give thumb drives to five people, who in turn give thumb drives to five people, who then give thumb drives to five people*
But who will destroy Big Thumbdrive, then?
An army of hyper-intelligent cybernetic apes, obviously.
If everybody on this planet just makes 1 second of entertainment, we could have 1,319 consecutive days of entertainment!
...that's only 3.6 years! We could do better!
if everybody on the planet makes a 1-minute video, BAM, 216 years of cinema
Just to be contrarian, Imma gonna go out and buy MORE first-hand musics. You should seen all the first-hand shit I bought myself for Christmas. I ain't gonna buy some piece of shit, second hand Korpiklaani CD with scratches and smudge marks that's gonna skip all over the damned place. I want the real McCoy, with brand new liner notes and the shiny album art.
The music industry is not destorying America. Hollywood isn't destroying America.
That's just nonsense.
If "Hollywood" has such grand ambitions, perhaps it should get a little practice and start out by destroying some small backwater African country first. Maybe by causing an earthquake.
What I'm trying to say is, Hollywood needs to shake Djibouti.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 19, 2012, 01:37:28 AM
If "Hollywood" has such grand ambitions, perhaps it should get a little practice and start out by destroying some small backwater African country first. Maybe by causing an earthquake.
What I'm trying to say is, Hollywood needs to shake Djibouti.
YOU'RE AN ASSHOLE, AND THAT WAS TERRIBLE! :tgrr:
On to the OP and subsequent discussion: What's wrong with kicking some cash to a wroking band, man? You know, I am rather fond of Eli August, after being introduced to him via Suu's show, but I unfortunately do not own any of his music. I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 19, 2012, 01:37:28 AM
If "Hollywood" has such grand ambitions, perhaps it should get a little practice and start out by destroying some small backwater African country first. Maybe by causing an earthquake.
What I'm trying to say is, Hollywood needs to shake Djibouti.
JESUS FUCKING FUCK :crankey:
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 05:55:24 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
The more I know about the companies that back the RIAA and MPAA, the less I think these laws have to do with protecting content from piracy. It leaves me baffled and I have no idea what they're really for, though.
I can tell you that you won't be hurting any of the big companies appreciably by boycotting physical media distribution.
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 05:55:24 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
Don't disagree with that, for sure. But I think that's a bit beside the point though, innit? I mean, the OP is calling for basically complete and total artistic... communism? I mean, recording ain't cheap. There is also a large time investment in writing and rehearsing, etc. I'm not sure distributing everything via kopyleft would be an equitable solution.
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 06:26:05 AM
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 05:55:24 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
Don't disagree with that, for sure. But I think that's a bit beside the point though, innit? I mean, the OP is calling for basically complete and total artistic... communism? I mean, recording ain't cheap. There is also a large time investment in writing and rehearsing, etc. I'm not sure distributing everything via kopyleft would be an equitable solution.
Yeah, it seemed immensely naive to call for a total boycott of all distributed media regardless of origin.
A band can expect to pay at the very least four figures for an ep with decent sound quality. My previous band paid about fifteen hundred for six songs. Avariel sank 20k into their 9 song album. And they were a local band. My cirrent band lucked out because we met a guy who knows how to do it and can afford to do it for shits and giggles in his basement that he converted into a recording studio on one side and a damn convincing irish pub on the other. I thought i died and went to heaven (fourth attempt at posting this)
Antipiracy lobby: Dear Guvmint, people are stealing from us - this sucks!
Fourth Reich: Dear Antipiracy lobby, no probs we haz solution - we'll invade Afghanistan and also install spycamz in every toilet in teh USA
Antipiracy lobby: Okay ... so this will help how?
Fourth Reich: Very complicated, trust us we haz your bestest interests at heart
Antipiracy lobby: But I don't see how ...
Fourth Reich: Okay, it's quite simple, first you back the bill and then we don't kill your families. Here, have some spondoolicks.
Antipiracy lobby: Ah, of course, yes we understand now. Yeah we'll back that all the way.
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2012, 11:33:07 PMOn the other hand, the NSA is developing cyber-warfare centres across the USA with a large enough capacity to store half of all the information on the internet, Facebook already has 1800 pages worth of information on you and Google are letting the government read your emails via a purpose built backdoor.
People getting all worked up about SOPA from a civil liberties POV are missing the point: that ship already sailed. Total Information Awareness has been the name of the game since 2003. Wake up and smell the retroactive FISA immunity bill. They're spying on the Quakers, so they're sure as fuck spying on you. If you're worried about this being used to squash internal dissent, you're missing the fact the President can just send a a Predator drone or JSOC hitsquad around your place to blow your brains out - all perfectly legally.
I'm all for kicking megacorps in the teeth and pissing on their wheaties, but lets not build this up into anything it's not.
Well said.
On the other hand, yesterday I read an article of a guy that did IMO have the right idea:
http://ploum.net/post/im-a-pirate
he advocates piracy, but also advocates supporting artists, especially the smaller ones. he wonders, among other things, how come the artists that get downloaded *most*, are so rich then?
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 06:12:17 AMThe more I know about the companies that back the RIAA and MPAA, the less I think these laws have to do with protecting content from piracy. It leaves me baffled and I have no idea what they're really for, though.
Yes. It's just a theory, but I think it's something like a money/power bubble that's about to bust. The recording and movie industries grew into a billion dollar industry. The problem is, a very large part of this whole chain of industries is becoming very obsolete in the past 10-15 years.
Imagine, the theoretical cost of transporting media went from transporting heavy movie reels of film worth hundreds of thousands dollar a piece to the cost of zapping a few gigs of video through the transatlantic fibre-optics, aka Free as in Aspartame.
But most movies are still distributed this way. Which is why we get USA movies a few weeks later in Europe, because there's only so many expensive reels to go around. Sounds completely retarded, right? Even more retarded is that in some cases they did switch to digital distribution, but they still cling to this time-staggered distribution model, supposedly because otherwise the cinemas that don't have this "advanced digital technology"* yet would have an unfair disadvantage (note that this does not profit the customer one bit and the only reason they can even do this is because of their monopoly). Further down the road this is how we got DVD region codes.
So much money is involved in making this process look as complex and magical as possible, that they'll bend backwards all the way to prevent people from getting such ludicrous ideas as shouldn't it be possible to just push a button and zap a few gigs over the transatlantic fibre-optics?
And this is just one thing. Most parts of that industry are important-seeming people trying to appear as if they're doing critically important and expensive jobs, that are in fact almost completely obsolete thanks to do the digital revolution (and possibly other factors).
This is not to say that there's no actors to be paid, locations, camera men, equipment, studio editing, etc. There's a certain core of true hard work involved in making a movie, and it's not cheap. A friend of mine does some semi professional film making and I got an idea how involved it is. But it's just work, and organizing shit. It's not a multi billion dollar industry.
That's just more of the façade, because what do these 100 millions Hollywood budgets give us, as the consumer vs a lower budget movie? More explosions, more CGI, more 3D, Christian Bale and Johnny Depp. But the stories remain remixed comic books. Is the increased cost worth it in customer value if the stories are just shitty? Of course not! It is just another excuse to throw away money at an industry that's terrified that people notice it's actually 90% dead weight.
Sorry I'm rambling. I'll try to get to my point. The point is, I think a lot more than we currently realize in the "big media" industries is completely obsolete. And that bubble is in danger of bursting. But there's still a lot of money and power in this industry, so it's lashing about in panic, trying to keep its status and seem big and relevant.
And piracy is one of those things that somehow exposes the dead bits. And it seems that smaller, more efficient companies are somewhat embracing it, because face it, if you play it right, it's great marketing. But accepting the 1080p BlueRay-rips as legit media would force the deadweight industry to admit that, yes, in fact transporting a film in cinema-quality is as easy as pushing a button and zapping it through the transatlantic fibre-optics.
*projector with a HDMI plug and a modern desktop PC.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 19, 2012, 10:30:54 AM
Antipiracy lobby: Dear Guvmint, people are stealing from us - this sucks!
Fourth Reich: Dear Antipiracy lobby, no probs we haz solution - we'll invade Afghanistan and also install spycamz in every toilet in teh USA
Antipiracy lobby: Okay ... so this will help how?
Fourth Reich: Very complicated, trust us we haz your bestest interests at heart
Antipiracy lobby: But I don't see how ...
Fourth Reich: Okay, it's quite simple, first you back the bill and then we don't kill your families. Here, have some spondoolicks.
Antipiracy lobby: Ah, of course, yes we understand now. Yeah we'll back that all the way.
LOL, no, in the US it's more like "Hey, we want legislation passed that makes it easier for us to go after companies we want to claim are infringing on our copyrights... and by the way, if things look good for our bottom line in the second quarter, we think we could push a half-mil or so in bundled contributions toward your re-election campaign."
Congressman: "Hmmmm... I bet we could insert some verbiage that would allow us to shut down any website at any time without due process. It's a deal!"
I haven't traced all of the big four to their umbrella corps, but it looks like they may all be owned by the big five information corporations... which would make it not entirely unlikely that this is really about controlling information on the internet. The big five already (for all practical purposes) own the airwaves and print, so it makes sense that the internet would be their next bid.
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 06:26:05 AM
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 05:55:24 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
Don't disagree with that, for sure. But I think that's a bit beside the point though, innit? I mean, the OP is calling for basically complete and total artistic... communism? I mean, recording ain't cheap. There is also a large time investment in writing and rehearsing, etc. I'm not sure distributing everything via kopyleft would be an equitable solution.
Yeah, observation completely tangential to the OP/current discussion. Probably should have made that clear.
I mostly agree with the pirate Triple Zero linked, but have a few issues and exceptions.
First off, the "never buy a CD" thing: In some cases, following this literally would take money directly from the artist. I rarely buy physical CDs, but when I do it's usually directly from a band/performer at a show and usually one that they've financed themselves. I might be able to download the music for free or cheaper, but this way I'm helping them cover the gas money. Of course, this guy says he doesn't go to shows, so it might not apply to him.
The "the artists are only getting a small portion of the money, so it's ok to deprive them of their pittance" doesn't quite work for me. Kind of like justifying not tipping your server because they make less than minimum wage. And yes, I realize the point is to deprive the bad actor company of profits, but not sure that justifies the artist as collateral damage (especially coming from someone who, again, doesn't go to concerts, which in my understanding is where most musicians make the bulk of their money anyway). My usual rule is that for an artist who is not signed with a major record label or who consistently puts out good material, I'll pay for their work if it's available on a pay site. I usually restrict pirated downloads to either live/unreleased stuff I can't buy, artists (or songs form albums by questionable artists) that I'm unfamiliar with and just want to check out (if I like it, I'll buy something from them later), stuff I've paid for in a different format in the past, or things I'm not downloading to listen to myself (this doesn't happen much any more, but when I drove a cab the right music could make me extra tip money, so I downloaded a lot of shit that I could stand to listen to but didn't really want to listen to). And these days a lot of times I'll even pay for that stuff because I've got a pretty shitty internet connection and it's less trouble to just buy a song than to deal with all the viruses and mislabeled files (for open torrent/peer to peer sites) or incredibly nitpicky rules (for the Oink-like sites) that you have to download to get them for free.
As for Trip's comments, I think he hits a lot of things right on the money, particularly the "dead weight" issue. For movies, there's also apparently a perception among the studios that producing a movie without spending a lot of money is a bad idea for some reason. Years and years ago I saw Neil Gaiman speak at DragonCon and he talked about how he was having trouble selling a Death movie because it wouldn't cost enough money to make.
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 10:48:31 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 19, 2012, 10:30:54 AM
Antipiracy lobby: Dear Guvmint, people are stealing from us - this sucks!
Fourth Reich: Dear Antipiracy lobby, no probs we haz solution - we'll invade Afghanistan and also install spycamz in every toilet in teh USA
Antipiracy lobby: Okay ... so this will help how?
Fourth Reich: Very complicated, trust us we haz your bestest interests at heart
Antipiracy lobby: But I don't see how ...
Fourth Reich: Okay, it's quite simple, first you back the bill and then we don't kill your families. Here, have some spondoolicks.
Antipiracy lobby: Ah, of course, yes we understand now. Yeah we'll back that all the way.
LOL, no, in the US it's more like "Hey, we want legislation passed that makes it easier for us to go after companies we want to claim are infringing on our copyrights... and by the way, if things look good for our bottom line in the second quarter, we think we could push a half-mil or so in bundled contributions toward your re-election campaign."
Congressman: "Hmmmm... I bet we could insert some verbiage that would allow us to shut down any website at any time without due process. It's a deal!"
https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca (https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca)
It's a long article, but it covers some of the ways companies have tried to use the DMCA that have nothing to do with IP protection. I think it's a safe bet that those are the starting points for PIPA/SOPA.
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 06:12:17 AM
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 05:55:24 AM
Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 19, 2012, 01:59:51 AM
I s'pose if I looked hard enough I could find it and download it. But I'd rather just buy an album from him and you know, make sure he gets paid for the work he did for my enjoyment.
That bit there is my biggest issue with the way the music and movie industries are going about their attempts at "IP protection" through laws like SOPA. I honestly believe that most things that get downloaded illegally are things that aren't available for legitimate purchase (concert recordings, for example), or things that the downloader probably wouldn't have paid for in the first place, especially these days when paid downloads are relatively cheap and easy versus finding a pirate copy that's correctly labeled and not more virus-laden than Charlie Sheen. Overly-strict IP laws, IMO, are really about protecting the mainstream entertainment industry's right to profit from content that is just enough to the positive side of mediocre that some people will begrudgingly pay for it if they have no other choice. Creators of content that is legitimately good can profit without overly-restrictive IP laws simply be virtue of the fact that they're creating good content that people actually want to pay for.
The more I know about the companies that back the RIAA and MPAA, the less I think these laws have to do with protecting content from piracy. It leaves me baffled and I have no idea what they're really for, though.
I can tell you that you won't be hurting any of the big companies appreciably by boycotting physical media distribution.
I meant to boycott legal music downloads as well. They're all firsthand.
You still haven't explained, well, anything really.
Is there a point to this aside from you not wanting to pay for your entertainment?
How would you suggest musicians/actors/etc. get paid for their work?
Thats even worse as musicians can get more of a cut from legal downloads.
And you still havent addressed my questions about this. Why should i as a working musician forego payment? How does this make me more free? Especially where since im not signed any profits are direct and dont support anything but the bandmembers?
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 19, 2012, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2012, 11:33:07 PMOn the other hand, the NSA is developing cyber-warfare centres across the USA with a large enough capacity to store half of all the information on the internet, Facebook already has 1800 pages worth of information on you and Google are letting the government read your emails via a purpose built backdoor.
People getting all worked up about SOPA from a civil liberties POV are missing the point: that ship already sailed. Total Information Awareness has been the name of the game since 2003. Wake up and smell the retroactive FISA immunity bill. They're spying on the Quakers, so they're sure as fuck spying on you. If you're worried about this being used to squash internal dissent, you're missing the fact the President can just send a a Predator drone or JSOC hitsquad around your place to blow your brains out - all perfectly legally.
I'm all for kicking megacorps in the teeth and pissing on their wheaties, but lets not build this up into anything it's not.
Well said.
On the other hand, yesterday I read an article of a guy that did IMO have the right idea:
http://ploum.net/post/im-a-pirate
he advocates piracy, but also advocates supporting artists, especially the smaller ones. he wonders, among other things, how come the artists that get downloaded *most*, are so rich then?
Totally onboard with this idea
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 19, 2012, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 06:12:17 AMThe more I know about the companies that back the RIAA and MPAA, the less I think these laws have to do with protecting content from piracy. It leaves me baffled and I have no idea what they're really for, though.
Yes. It's just a theory, but I think it's something like a money/power bubble that's about to bust. The recording and movie industries grew into a billion dollar industry. The problem is, a very large part of this whole chain of industries is becoming very obsolete in the past 10-15 years.
Imagine, the theoretical cost of transporting media went from transporting heavy movie reels of film worth hundreds of thousands dollar a piece to the cost of zapping a few gigs of video through the transatlantic fibre-optics, aka Free as in Aspartame.
But most movies are still distributed this way. Which is why we get USA movies a few weeks later in Europe, because there's only so many expensive reels to go around. Sounds completely retarded, right? Even more retarded is that in some cases they did switch to digital distribution, but they still cling to this time-staggered distribution model, supposedly because otherwise the cinemas that don't have this "advanced digital technology"* yet would have an unfair disadvantage (note that this does not profit the customer one bit and the only reason they can even do this is because of their monopoly). Further down the road this is how we got DVD region codes.
So much money is involved in making this process look as complex and magical as possible, that they'll bend backwards all the way to prevent people from getting such ludicrous ideas as shouldn't it be possible to just push a button and zap a few gigs over the transatlantic fibre-optics?
And this is just one thing. Most parts of that industry are important-seeming people trying to appear as if they're doing critically important and expensive jobs, that are in fact almost completely obsolete thanks to do the digital revolution (and possibly other factors).
This is not to say that there's no actors to be paid, locations, camera men, equipment, studio editing, etc. There's a certain core of true hard work involved in making a movie, and it's not cheap. A friend of mine does some semi professional film making and I got an idea how involved it is. But it's just work, and organizing shit. It's not a multi billion dollar industry.
That's just more of the façade, because what do these 100 millions Hollywood budgets give us, as the consumer vs a lower budget movie? More explosions, more CGI, more 3D, Christian Bale and Johnny Depp. But the stories remain remixed comic books. Is the increased cost worth it in customer value if the stories are just shitty? Of course not! It is just another excuse to throw away money at an industry that's terrified that people notice it's actually 90% dead weight.
Sorry I'm rambling. I'll try to get to my point. The point is, I think a lot more than we currently realize in the "big media" industries is completely obsolete. And that bubble is in danger of bursting. But there's still a lot of money and power in this industry, so it's lashing about in panic, trying to keep its status and seem big and relevant.
And piracy is one of those things that somehow exposes the dead bits. And it seems that smaller, more efficient companies are somewhat embracing it, because face it, if you play it right, it's great marketing. But accepting the 1080p BlueRay-rips as legit media would force the deadweight industry to admit that, yes, in fact transporting a film in cinema-quality is as easy as pushing a button and zapping it through the transatlantic fibre-optics.
*projector with a HDMI plug and a modern desktop PC.
This more clearly communicates much of the point that i was trying to get across. The movie industry is unnecessary because with modern technology their entire function in society could easily be fulfilled on a shoestring budget by independent artists. May I reprint this on some of the other forums where I posted my manifesto? As I said, I think that it communicates a large part of my point more effectively than I did.
Ech im pretty sure at this point hes not actually going to answer our questions. I think hes just trying to justify his sense of entitlement to free entertainment as some sort noble crusade and that musicians should just suck it up.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
You still haven't explained, well, anything really.
Is there a point to this aside from you not wanting to pay for your entertainment?
This is about retribution for SOPA and PIPA, even if they don't get passed, the fact that they've gotten as far as they did is by itself worthy of retribution.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
How would you suggest musicians/actors/etc. get paid for their work?
I don't know, and for that I'm sorry. I bear no ill will towards the actual artists, but something has to be done about their corporate masters, and I don't foresee any any magical means making itself available to take down or even slightly weaken the RIAA and MPAA without any collateral damage. In my eye, however, the important thing is that the forseeable collateral damage is less than the damage that the RIAA and MPAA will do if left unchecked. Is nearly impossible to kill the king without capturing a few pawns.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 01:53:37 AM
Ech im pretty sure at this point hes not actually going to answer our questions. I think hes just trying to justify his sense of entitlement to free entertainment as some sort noble crusade and that musicians should just suck it up.
This is about the potential for things like SOPA and PIPA to completely fuck up things like Wikipedia and about weakening the companies that support such legislation. I am not in theory opposed to paying for entertainment, but I propose to flood the market with free entertainment to weaken the massively corrupt companies that control the entertainment industry at the current time.
(http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/154187_10150105519007489_529202488_7775453_5067350_n.jpg)
Thats totally unfair man. I would suggest to you that you support local musicians and minor labels if you have qualms about that sort of thing. And while i think the likes of metallica are tools and dont need any more money but they are providing a service and should be compensated regardless if they are on a major label.
You would get a better response if your answer was "boycott artists that are represented by a major label" or "only purchase music and other forms of entertainment directly from the artists." Which still doesn't cover the issue that larger productions still require up front money, and the people who provide that money are entitled to make some profit off of it.
Theres already free entertainment. Its called karaoke open mic youtube and buying your own guitar. The market is already flooded with free entertainment and its not stopping the music industry. Im cool with stopping this legislation but in theory not opposing musicians getting paid isnt what you said. You should buy first hand music but maybe you want to be more conscientious about it rather than looking like a dude who cant be arsed to pay a couple of bucks every so often.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 02:08:33 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
You still haven't explained, well, anything really.
Is there a point to this aside from you not wanting to pay for your entertainment?
This is about retribution for SOPA and PIPA, even if they don't get passed, the fact that they've gotten as far as they did is by itself worthy of retribution.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
How would you suggest musicians/actors/etc. get paid for their work?
I don't know, and for that I'm sorry. I bear no ill will towards the actual artists, but something has to be done about their corporate masters, and I don't foresee any any magical means making itself available to take down or even slightly weaken the RIAA and MPAA without any collateral damage. In my eye, however, the important thing is that the forseeable collateral damage is less than the damage that the RIAA and MPAA will do if left unchecked. Is nearly impossible to kill the king without capturing a few pawns.
That's so fucking retarded that it's making my eye twitch. I have to back out of this thread now before I get ugly.
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 10:51:24 PM
I haven't traced all of the big four to their umbrella corps, but it looks like they may all be owned by the big five information corporations... which would make it not entirely unlikely that this is really about controlling information on the internet. The big five already (for all practical purposes) own the airwaves and print, so it makes sense that the internet would be their next bid.
One of them is Disney.
Just saying.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 02:08:33 AM
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
You still haven't explained, well, anything really.
Is there a point to this aside from you not wanting to pay for your entertainment?
This is about retribution for SOPA and PIPA, even if they don't get passed, the fact that they've gotten as far as they did is by itself worthy of retribution.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 01:49:49 AM
How would you suggest musicians/actors/etc. get paid for their work?
I don't know, and for that I'm sorry. I bear no ill will towards the actual artists, but something has to be done about their corporate masters, and I don't foresee any any magical means making itself available to take down or even slightly weaken the RIAA and MPAA without any collateral damage. In my eye, however, the important thing is that the forseeable collateral damage is less than the damage that the RIAA and MPAA will do if left unchecked. Is nearly impossible to kill the king without capturing a few pawns.
I love that. "Collateral damage". It sounds so harmless.
Let's just try that out, shall we?
QuoteATTN, ARTISTS: YOU must quit and go back to bussing tables, so that I may continue to enjoy the freedom of taking your work for nothing.
Or how about:
QuoteI demand free downloads until nobody bothers making new music.
Or better yet:
QuoteIf you were a REAL artist, you'd do this for the sheer love of it, and not make me pay for your work.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 02:14:36 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 01:53:37 AM
Ech im pretty sure at this point hes not actually going to answer our questions. I think hes just trying to justify his sense of entitlement to free entertainment as some sort noble crusade and that musicians should just suck it up.
This is about the potential for things like SOPA and PIPA to completely fuck up things like Wikipedia and about weakening the companies that support such legislation. I am not in theory opposed to paying for entertainment, but I propose to flood the market with free entertainment to weaken the massively corrupt companies that control the entertainment industry at the current time.
So fucking get on it. I expect 20 albums out of you by tomorrow.
ETA: Or did you mean you were just going to steal from lots of people?
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 19, 2012, 01:37:28 AM
If "Hollywood" has such grand ambitions, perhaps it should get a little practice and start out by destroying some small backwater African country first. Maybe by causing an earthquake.
What I'm trying to say is, Hollywood needs to shake Djibouti.
:crankey:
MY VENGEANCE WILL BE A THING OF LEGEND!
I think you guys are wrong in attributing SOPA and PIPA to the sheer malice and evilness of evil corporations.
It's more like Triple Zero said, that MPAA is not being evil, but is instead being stupid and desperate.
I mean, if this was about a crazy conspiracy trying to control the flow of information or whatever, Google would have supported those laws.
Most likely this is exactly what it looks like, and they really believed those crazy laws would reduce piracy, and didn't care about the side effects.
ECH's 1st Law: Never attribute to intentional evil that which can be explained by stupidity or incompetence.
ECH's 1st Corollary: 98% of humanity is either stupid or incompetent.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 04:33:51 AM
ECH's 1st Law: Never attribute to intentional evil that which can be explained by stupidity or incompetence.
ECH's 1st Corollary: 98% of humanity is either stupid or incompetent.
YOIKED
Don't just take my word or ECH's for it:
http://boingboing.net/2011/12/27/the-coming-war-on-general-purp.html
In this video, Cory Doctorow carefully explains exactly how much of an idiot the entertainment industry can be.
If you don't have time for a 55 minutes video, just read the transcriptions at the bottom of the article.
Hey rog you know what i like just as much as collateral damage? Pawns. Oh yeah. Some pawns must be sacrificed.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 20, 2012, 04:33:51 AM
ECH's 1st Law: Never attribute to intentional evil that which can be explained by stupidity or incompetence.
ECH's 1st Corollary: 98% of humanity is either stupid or incompetent.
ECH's law is also known as Hanlon's Razor.
ECH's second law is rank optimism.
:lulz:
That depends. You didn't ask me about the other 2%.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 11:36:00 AM
Hey rog you know what i like just as much as collateral damage? Pawns. Oh yeah. Some pawns must be sacrificed.
STFU and get back to the song mines, pawn! I demand free entertainment now!
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 02:15:08 AM
Thats totally unfair man. I would suggest to you that you support local musicians and minor labels if you have qualms about that sort of thing.
I'll add a line to this effect to my manifesto.
Yessir!!!
Pick. Axe.
Ok diogenes. Thats better than asking us not to get paid. Now maybe you might also want to consider a flat out boycott of major label acts rather than not paying them for stuff they created.
Editted for accidental omission of not.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:18 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 10:51:24 PM
I haven't traced all of the big four to their umbrella corps, but it looks like they may all be owned by the big five information corporations... which would make it not entirely unlikely that this is really about controlling information on the internet. The big five already (for all practical purposes) own the airwaves and print, so it makes sense that the internet would be their next bid.
One of them is Disney.
Just saying.
Yep. Another one traces back to Comcast.
SOPA and PIPA have nothing to do with copyright protection. They have to do with media control.
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 04:24:17 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:18 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 10:51:24 PM
I haven't traced all of the big four to their umbrella corps, but it looks like they may all be owned by the big five information corporations... which would make it not entirely unlikely that this is really about controlling information on the internet. The big five already (for all practical purposes) own the airwaves and print, so it makes sense that the internet would be their next bid.
One of them is Disney.
Just saying.
Yep. Another one traces back to Comcast.
SOPA and PIPA have nothing to do with copyright protection. They have to do with media control.
Actually, I've got the current list at the house. I'll be happy to post it when I get home.
I've added another line to the suggesting that the many people out there who don't want to cut out mainstream media entirely could instead limit their patronage to films, bands, etc where the actors, singers, directors, etc have publicly expressed opposition to SOPA.
Here's my deal, PDS: If artists don't have a right to be paid for their work, then neither does anyone else. We merely enjoy privilege.
You stealing a song is - simply put - stealing from someone trying to make a living.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 04:48:21 PM
Here's my deal, PDS: If artists don't have a right to be paid for their work, then neither does anyone else. We merely enjoy privilege.
You stealing a song is - simply put - stealing from someone trying to make a living.
Exactly!!
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 04:48:21 PM
Here's my deal, PDS: If artists don't have a right to be paid for their work, then neither does anyone else. We merely enjoy privilege.
You stealing a song is - simply put - stealing from someone trying to make a living.
I'm not saying that we should pirate things. My manifesto does not at any time mention ripping off copyrighted music.
This manifesto is supposed to be more directed to the people who already have some inclination to make their own free stuff purely to express themselves to get off their asses and do it. I have no problem with paying artists for their for their music, acting, writing, etc. (My problem is purely with the corrupt middlemen between them and myself).
(Perhaps I should also add a line supporting artists who sell their work directly to the consumer)
Maybe you didn't think this through too much...
I believe you also mentioned something about not buying first hand music. This suggests that you are somehow getting your music without giving the artist their due. If youre buying a used cd cool. Otherwise second hand seems to indicate piracy.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 05:06:40 PM
I believe you also mentioned something about not buying first hand music. This suggests that you are somehow getting your music without giving the artist their due. If youre buying a used cd cool. Otherwise second hand seems to indicate piracy.
The implication was supposed to be to buy secondhand. I shall make that explicit.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 04:57:02 PM
This manifesto is supposed to be more directed to the people who already have some inclination to make their own free stuff purely to express themselves to get off their asses and do it.
Okay, but you're going to need more than just AKK to make a difference.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 05:09:21 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 05:06:40 PM
I believe you also mentioned something about not buying first hand music. This suggests that you are somehow getting your music without giving the artist their due. If youre buying a used cd cool. Otherwise second hand seems to indicate piracy.
The implication was supposed to be to buy secondhand. I shall make that explicit.
Ok, I've fixed it.
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 05:09:21 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 20, 2012, 05:06:40 PM
I believe you also mentioned something about not buying first hand music. This suggests that you are somehow getting your music without giving the artist their due. If youre buying a used cd cool. Otherwise second hand seems to indicate piracy.
The implication was supposed to be to buy secondhand. I shall make that explicit.
You're still fucking the artist, but at least you're supporting
a brick & mortar store Ebay.
There is still an implication here that any artist that is considered "mainstream" is part of the problem and needs to be punished. Just to put that into perspective, that would mean a band like Sonic Youth, who have been a major label recording artist. Now, anyone who knows anything about Thurston Moore and the Youth would know that they don't exactly fit into the same mold as a band like Metallica that's bitched and moaned about Napster, et al. But they signed with a major label, in part, to cast a wider net with their music and get more people into what the art they are producing.
I dunno, this seems rather akin to an idea of being pissed off about the War in Iraq and spitting on the soldiers to punish the lawmakers that put them in the dessert. Entertainers deserve to be paid and supported like any other person working and creating a product in the USA. "Destroying Hollywood" isn't going to accomplish what you think it will accomplish, and you'll be taking out a whole host of hard-working Americans while the Fat Cats remain fat.
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 05:50:27 PM
There is still an implication here that any artist that is considered "mainstream" is part of the problem and needs to be punished.
With the exception of James Hetfield
1, I'm with you on this one. Being good at what you do is no reason to be punished.
1 His whining makes me want bad things to happen to him. And his cat.
You'll get no argument from me there.
Quote from: RWHN on January 20, 2012, 05:50:27 PM
There is still an implication here that any artist that is considered "mainstream" is part of the problem and needs to be punished. Just to put that into perspective, that would mean a band like Sonic Youth, who have been a major label recording artist. Now, anyone who knows anything about Thurston Moore and the Youth would know that they don't exactly fit into the same mold as a band like Metallica that's bitched and moaned about Napster, et al. But they signed with a major label, in part, to cast a wider net with their music and get more people into what the art they are producing.
I dunno, this seems rather akin to an idea of being pissed off about the War in Iraq and spitting on the soldiers to punish the lawmakers that put them in the dessert. Entertainers deserve to be paid and supported like any other person working and creating a product in the USA. "Destroying Hollywood" isn't going to accomplish what you think it will accomplish, and you'll be taking out a whole host of hard-working Americans while the Fat Cats remain fat.
Whether a band deserves to be compensated for their artistic efforts or not I think is pretty well agreed upon ITT (yes, they fucking do). Choosing not to purchase from any label would just be the most intellectually sound way of trying to get at what the original goal here kind of was (to punish the machine that is distributing content and also being dickholes). While that in theory could hurt some artists who are already on labels, that does not prevent artists from leaving labels to go the independent distribution route, nor does it constitute theft in any meaningful sense (unless you are then pirating their music instead of doing without).
Alternatively, I could see trying to convince people to pirate
everything and then mail $20 to the artists directly, but a) people are dicks and wouldn't mail it in and b) that's a shitty way of doing things to begin with.
That concept gave me a chuckle.
Include the sound engineer on that bad idea too though. Thats a lot of work too.
A little nit-picky, I realize, but a boycott on any artist that signs with a label is also too broad. There are a lot of small labels that are not part of the problem and who treat their artists fairly and are actually fulfilling the useful role of handling a lot of the day-to-day business and promotion stuff that the artist can't handle themselves (John Prine's Oh Boy! Records comes to mind, but I'm sure there are a lot more). By boycotting all labels, you'd actually hurt labels who are doing what they're supposed to be doing. A real movement against the entertainment industry would require identifying the players that are causing a problem as well as the ones who are acting in good faith and educating people on which labels should and should not be supported. Otherwise, you're more likely to destroy a lot of good labels without doing any significant damage to the bad (on the off chance you destroy the bad labels along with the good, you're just creating a vacuum that will be filled with new and equally bad players). Of course, that kind of thing would require actual legwork and research and isn't nearly as cool as shouting "BURN IT DOWN!"
Quote from: kingyak on January 20, 2012, 06:39:12 PM
A little nit-picky, I realize, but a boycott on any artist that signs with a label is also too broad. There are a lot of small labels that are not part of the problem and who treat their artists fairly and are actually fulfilling the useful role of handling a lot of the day-to-day business and promotion stuff that the artist can't handle themselves (John Prine's Oh Boy! Records comes to mind, but I'm sure there are a lot more). By boycotting all labels, you'd actually hurt labels who are doing what they're supposed to be doing. A real movement against the entertainment industry would require identifying the players that are causing a problem as well as the ones who are acting in good faith and educating people on which labels should and should not be supported. Otherwise, you're more likely to destroy a lot of good labels without doing any significant damage to the bad (on the off chance you destroy the bad labels along with the good, you're just creating a vacuum that will be filled with new and equally bad players). Of course, that kind of thing would require actual legwork and research and isn't nearly as cool as shouting "BURN IT DOWN!"
Now you've done it. You've brought NUANCE into it, and that means PDS might have to THINK, instead of getting his KNEE JERK on, which is - at least in his mind - less likely to get him laid with hipster/trustafarian chicks.
Lol, "Can't kill the king without capturing a few pawns."
Tell me, PDS, how are you any different from people who rationalize bad shit by saying "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs"? I am somehow relating this saying to children dying in horrible, violent ways, but I don't know what particular thing I heard this about.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 04:40:44 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 04:24:17 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 03:41:18 AM
Quote from: Nigel on January 19, 2012, 10:51:24 PM
I haven't traced all of the big four to their umbrella corps, but it looks like they may all be owned by the big five information corporations... which would make it not entirely unlikely that this is really about controlling information on the internet. The big five already (for all practical purposes) own the airwaves and print, so it makes sense that the internet would be their next bid.
One of them is Disney.
Just saying.
Yep. Another one traces back to Comcast.
SOPA and PIPA have nothing to do with copyright protection. They have to do with media control.
Actually, I've got the current list at the house. I'll be happy to post it when I get home.
Please do!
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 07:21:02 PM
Lol, "Can't kill the king without capturing a few pawns."
Tell me, PDS, how are you any different from people who rationalize bad shit by saying "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs"? I am somehow relating this saying to children dying in horrible, violent ways, but I don't know what particular thing I heard this about.
But didn't Iraq show us that collateral damage is hunky dory?
Quote from: Nigel on January 20, 2012, 07:48:44 PM
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 20, 2012, 07:21:02 PM
Lol, "Can't kill the king without capturing a few pawns."
Tell me, PDS, how are you any different from people who rationalize bad shit by saying "You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs"? I am somehow relating this saying to children dying in horrible, violent ways, but I don't know what particular thing I heard this about.
But didn't Iraq show us that collateral damage is hunky dory?
:foam:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Quote from: kingyak on January 20, 2012, 06:39:12 PM
A little nit-picky, I realize, but a boycott on any artist that signs with a label is also too broad. There are a lot of small labels that are not part of the problem and who treat their artists fairly and are actually fulfilling the useful role of handling a lot of the day-to-day business and promotion stuff that the artist can't handle themselves (John Prine's Oh Boy! Records comes to mind, but I'm sure there are a lot more). By boycotting all labels, you'd actually hurt labels who are doing what they're supposed to be doing. A real movement against the entertainment industry would require identifying the players that are causing a problem as well as the ones who are acting in good faith and educating people on which labels should and should not be supported. Otherwise, you're more likely to destroy a lot of good labels without doing any significant damage to the bad (on the off chance you destroy the bad labels along with the good, you're just creating a vacuum that will be filled with new and equally bad players). Of course, that kind of thing would require actual legwork and research and isn't nearly as cool as shouting "BURN IT DOWN!"
Now you've done it. You've brought NUANCE into it, and that means PDS might have to THINK, instead of getting his KNEE JERK on, which is - at least in his mind - less likely to get him laid with hipster/trustafarian chicks.
Sorry about that. I keep forgetting how anti-American nuance is. One of these days the re-education will take, I swear on the soul of Ronald Reagan.
:teabagger1:
Quote from: kingyak on January 20, 2012, 07:58:01 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Quote from: kingyak on January 20, 2012, 06:39:12 PM
A little nit-picky, I realize, but a boycott on any artist that signs with a label is also too broad. There are a lot of small labels that are not part of the problem and who treat their artists fairly and are actually fulfilling the useful role of handling a lot of the day-to-day business and promotion stuff that the artist can't handle themselves (John Prine's Oh Boy! Records comes to mind, but I'm sure there are a lot more). By boycotting all labels, you'd actually hurt labels who are doing what they're supposed to be doing. A real movement against the entertainment industry would require identifying the players that are causing a problem as well as the ones who are acting in good faith and educating people on which labels should and should not be supported. Otherwise, you're more likely to destroy a lot of good labels without doing any significant damage to the bad (on the off chance you destroy the bad labels along with the good, you're just creating a vacuum that will be filled with new and equally bad players). Of course, that kind of thing would require actual legwork and research and isn't nearly as cool as shouting "BURN IT DOWN!"
Now you've done it. You've brought NUANCE into it, and that means PDS might have to THINK, instead of getting his KNEE JERK on, which is - at least in his mind - less likely to get him laid with hipster/trustafarian chicks.
Sorry about that. I keep forgetting how anti-American nuance is. One of these days the re-education will take, I swear on the soul of Ronald Reagan.
:teabagger1:
Too late, fucker. It's off to Wasilla for you.
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 11:51:42 PMFirst off, the "never buy a CD" thing: In some cases, following this literally would take money directly from the artist. I rarely buy physical CDs, but when I do it's usually directly from a band/performer at a show and usually one that they've financed themselves. I might be able to download the music for free or cheaper, but this way I'm helping them cover the gas money. Of course, this guy says he doesn't go to shows, so it might not apply to him.
I kind of got from that he would buy it on different media (mp3 download etc), because CDs are kind of obsolete pieces of plastic to him (regardless of who gets money from selling them). That's something I can identify with, I haven't touched my CDs in more than five years--except for long drives in cars that don't have a USB MP3 player socket, and then only like my 10 favourite albums from a (rather old) collection of a couple hundreds. Most of my CDs are still in a box somewhere, I really don't need them, the biggest reason why I keep them is because I spent a lot of money on them :)
I see your point about your other issues btw. I view it
slightly differently, but elaborating on that would just spark another everybody-goes-through-the-moves-nobody-changes-their-mind "legizalize pot" type of thread :P (we've been there before, several times) (it'll probably happen regardless of whether I elaborate but meh).
Quote from: Prelate Diogenes Shandor on January 20, 2012, 01:52:35 AM
This more clearly communicates much of the point that i was trying to get across. The movie industry is unnecessary because with modern technology their entire function in society could easily be fulfilled on a shoestring budget by independent artists. May I reprint this on some of the other forums where I posted my manifesto? As I said, I think that it communicates a large part of my point more effectively than I did.
Sure. Don't worry about attribution either, please, in case you manage to cut & paste it into a context that gets your point as badly across as the OP, I don't need my name attached to it.
Also, what I've seen, your OP didn't really try to get across much of those points, it tried to communicate a lot of other somewhat related points that I do not really agree with. I agree that it still did so in a very unclear manner, though.
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 20, 2012, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 11:51:42 PMFirst off, the "never buy a CD" thing: In some cases, following this literally would take money directly from the artist. I rarely buy physical CDs, but when I do it's usually directly from a band/performer at a show and usually one that they've financed themselves. I might be able to download the music for free or cheaper, but this way I'm helping them cover the gas money. Of course, this guy says he doesn't go to shows, so it might not apply to him.
I kind of got from that he would buy it on different media (mp3 download etc), because CDs are kind of obsolete pieces of plastic to him (regardless of who gets money from selling them). That's something I can identify with, I haven't touched my CDs in more than five years--except for long drives in cars that don't have a USB MP3 player socket, and then only like my 10 favourite albums from a (rather old) collection of a couple hundreds. Most of my CDs are still in a box somewhere, I really don't need them, the biggest reason why I keep them is because I spent a lot of money on them :)
I see your point about your other issues btw. I view it slightly differently, but elaborating on that would just spark another everybody-goes-through-the-moves-nobody-changes-their-mind "legizalize pot" type of thread :P (we've been there before, several times) (it'll probably happen regardless of whether I elaborate but meh).
Aww, c'mon. Just for once I want to be on top of the pile instead of on the bottom!
You're no fun! ;)
LOL okay, have at it.
I think all artists should be on call 24/7 to come to my house barefoot through the snow and perform for me, for free, while starving to death. Then I get to sell their remains on eBay as fan-relics and I get to sue their family.
Anything less would be infringing on my Freedom of Entitlement.
GO!!
For you trip, that is acceptable. However you must provide 4 dutch beers that arent heineken and i meal of whatever dutch people eat.
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 20, 2012, 11:32:41 PM
I kind of got from that he would buy it on different media (mp3 download etc), because CDs are kind of obsolete pieces of plastic to him (regardless of who gets money from selling them).
See, I didn't get that at all. I got "since I have in some way supported some artists in the past*, I have the right to steal from all the artists I want to." Basically a justification to make himself feel like he's not stealing from people, much like the OP.
*Not being familiar with the sites he mentioned, I don't know if he's downloading songs on a pay basis, a pay what you want basis, contributing to crowd-funded projects, or what. Also IIRC, this one admission that he's paid for music online was phrased as something he's done in the past with no indication that he does it on a regular basis or plans to do it again.
Oh and one dime bag. One for rwhn too if hes in the band. That means hell have to give me his ration.
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 21, 2012, 12:37:18 AM
LOL okay, have at it.
I think all artists should be on call 24/7 to come to my house barefoot through the snow and perform for me, for free, while starving to death. Then I get to sell their remains on eBay as fan-relics and I get to sue their family.
Anything less would be infringing on my Freedom of Entitlement.
GO!!
This almost works for me, but I also want the artists to give me blowjobs and ice cream.
Kingyak, hm, maybe I didn't read the article too carefully then.
Actually, he also gives "the industry is doing a shitty job" as a justification, but that's kind of like not tipping your waitress if the restaurant's noisy.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 21, 2012, 12:45:46 AM
Oh and one dime bag. One for rwhn too if hes in the band. That means hell have to give me his ration.
Sure, I'll take the Heineken.
See? Teamwork. Hi fives rev!
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 20, 2012, 11:32:41 PM
Quote from: kingyak on January 19, 2012, 11:51:42 PMFirst off, the "never buy a CD" thing: In some cases, following this literally would take money directly from the artist. I rarely buy physical CDs, but when I do it's usually directly from a band/performer at a show and usually one that they've financed themselves. I might be able to download the music for free or cheaper, but this way I'm helping them cover the gas money. Of course, this guy says he doesn't go to shows, so it might not apply to him.
I kind of got from that he would buy it on different media (mp3 download etc), because CDs are kind of obsolete pieces of plastic to him (regardless of who gets money from selling them). That's something I can identify with, I haven't touched my CDs in more than five years--except for long drives in cars that don't have a USB MP3 player socket, and then only like my 10 favourite albums from a (rather old) collection of a couple hundreds. Most of my CDs are still in a box somewhere, I really don't need them, the biggest reason why I keep them is because I spent a lot of money on them :)
I see your point about your other issues btw. I view it slightly differently, but elaborating on that would just spark another everybody-goes-through-the-moves-nobody-changes-their-mind "legizalize pot" type of thread :P (we've been there before, several times) (it'll probably happen regardless of whether I elaborate but meh).
Actually he explicitly stated just the opposite.
Okay. I really should read it again, then :)
YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:
YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (http://ycombinator.com/rfs9.html) (discussion thread (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3491542))
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 21, 2012, 10:24:32 PM
YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:
YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (http://ycombinator.com/rfs9.html) (discussion thread (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3491542))
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood
Perfect!
Quote"Such ridiculous, destructive bills should never even pass committee review," Mr. Arment wrote. The real problem, he added, is "the MPAA's buying power in Congress," a reference to the Motion Picture Association of America. "This is a campaign finance problem."
There's somebody in that discussion thread whining about how it's not fair because he knows people in the industry and they're good people and apparently there's loads of "creative people" that are waiting tables (waiting for their "big break") but they are protected by the Hollywood scene and they would all lose their income if YC ends up destroying Hollywood.
Or something.
Yeah, maybe one day they'll be asked to help write the script adaptation for Wolverine XVII: This Time It's the Honest Truth about his Mysterious Past!
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 21, 2012, 10:24:32 PM
YCombinator, the startup venture capital corp behind HackerNews also got the idea Hollywood must be destroyed:
YCombinator--Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood (http://ycombinator.com/rfs9.html) (discussion thread (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3491542))
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/y-combinator-goes-on-the-offensive-against-hollywood
I think the "fund alternatives" plan is a lot more viable than the "expect creators to work for free" plan. I hope I'm not being to controversial.
Sure, but that means spending money....YOU FASCIST STOOGE OF HOLLYWOOD!
Quote from: Triple Zero on January 21, 2012, 11:08:55 PM
There's somebody in that discussion thread whining about how it's not fair because he knows people in the industry and they're good people and apparently there's loads of "creative people" that are waiting tables (waiting for their "big break") but they are protected by the Hollywood scene and they would all lose their income if YC ends up destroying Hollywood.
Or something.
Wait... somebody thinks that stimulating competition is "not fair"? :lol:
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2012, 11:33:07 PM
On the other hand, the NSA is developing cyber-warfare centres across the USA with a large enough capacity to store half of all the information on the internet, Facebook already has 1800 pages worth of information on you and Google are letting the government read your emails via a purpose built backdoor.
People getting all worked up about SOPA from a civil liberties POV are missing the point: that ship already sailed. Total Information Awareness has been the name of the game since 2003. Wake up and smell the retroactive FISA immunity bill. They're spying on the Quakers, so they're sure as fuck spying on you. If you're worried about this being used to squash internal dissent, you're missing the fact the President can just send a a Predator drone or JSOC hitsquad around your place to blow your brains out - all perfectly legally.
I'm all for kicking megacorps in the teeth and pissing on their wheaties, but lets not build this up into anything it's not.
But Cain, we're the GOOD people, he would never ever ever do something like that to us! These little things we do to get around copyright protections and watch season 243 of The Wire is so much more important than indefinite detainment and murder which will never affect us directly. We're (otherwise) Good Americans! The only thing we have to hide is our Pirate Bay torrents!
I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.
There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 06:57:35 PM
I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.
There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.
The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on January 22, 2012, 07:07:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 06:57:35 PM
I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.
There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.
The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.
Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.
Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 07:29:58 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on January 22, 2012, 07:07:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 06:57:35 PM
I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.
There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.
The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.
Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.
Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.
You are right. 25 years ago, the only way we would know about a non-local event would be through one of a few newspapers, or one of a few television networks. Any information from outside one's social circle was heavily filtered. Perhaps I forget this because I was 10 when I first used the Internet.
Was there any way for the average person to fact check recent events before the Internet?
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on January 22, 2012, 08:54:55 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 07:29:58 PM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on January 22, 2012, 07:07:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on January 22, 2012, 06:57:35 PM
I am going to say it again; these bills are not about piracy. They are about giving the big five control of content on the internet. They are about controlling information, because without accurate and accessible information, there is no democracy, and they are about controlling communication, because without accessible communication, there is no organized dissent.
There is actually a lot at stake here, because the big five already control broadcast and print media. They tell Americans what America thinks, and Americans sit in our BIPs and rail against the injustice and the stupidity of all those other Americans, and believe that we are too small to do anything. With people increasingly turning to the Internet for information, the existence of unbiased and accurate information online is becoming a threat, and the corporate powers-that-be want to nail a board over that hole.
The problem is in thinking that they [the corporate powers] don't already control the Internet, or they [the government] can't simply take down websites as they please. Even without SOPA, I think we will see more of what happened to Megaupload.
Nonsense. The internet is increasingly dominated by big media, but it is far from controlled by it at this point. I strongly disagree with this "all is already lost" perspective. The relative freedom of the internet compared with, for instance, television broadcasting, is what allowed highly popular websites to protest SOPA and PIPA. It is what allowed the growth of the Occupy movement.
Yes, the government can and will shut down websites more or less at will, but the only reason we know about the backlash against the shutdown of Megaupload is because of the relative independence of internet information, and the only chance of preventing a Big Media takeover is to continue to use the freedom of the internet to spread information and dissent. The government will do Big Corp's bidding until and unless it fears the people.
You are right. 25 years ago, the only way we would know about a non-local event would be through one of a few newspapers, or one of a few television networks. Any information from outside one's social circle was heavily filtered. Perhaps I forget this because I was 10 when I first used the Internet.
Was there any way for the average person to fact check recent events before the Internet?
25 years ago, the media situation wasn't quite as dire as it is now. You could cross-reference different newspapers, and they would be actually owned by different companies and have reporters who did more than regurgitate the AP report.
Yes. Journalism and books.
One of my favourite political writers, Jonathan Schwarz, often uses books and interviews to great effect. For example:
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001494.html
QuoteThere's almost no new information in George Tenet's book. But he does come up with an internal CIA email that I don't think has ever been published. It was sent on August 30, 2001 from one CIA analyst to another assigned as a liaison to the FBI. It's about the FBI's failure to ask for a warrant to search the belongings of Zacarias Moussaoui:
QuotePlease excuse my obvious frustration in this case. I am highly concerned that this is not paid the amount of attention it deserves. I do not want to be responsible when they [sic] surface again as members [sic] of a suicide terrorist op...I want an answer from a named FBI group chief for the record on these questions...several of which I have been asking since a week and a half ago. It is critical that a paper trail be established and clear. If this guy is let go, two years from now he will be talking to a control tower while aiming a 747 at the White House.
Or as Condoleezza Rice put it: "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would...try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."
In fairness to Rice, though, the planes hijacked on 9/11 weren't 747s. Advantage: Condoleezza!
Obviously a level of critical thinking is also required, and the process is much slower, but you eventually got there.
Quote from: Cain on January 22, 2012, 06:24:57 PM
Sure, but that means spending money....YOU FASCIST STOOGE OF HOLLYWOOD!
Not if we switch to an economy based on anarchy symbols and trite slogans.
Quote from: kingyak on January 23, 2012, 12:40:59 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 22, 2012, 06:24:57 PM
Sure, but that means spending money....YOU FASCIST STOOGE OF HOLLYWOOD!
Not if we switch to an economy based on anarchy symbols and trite slogans.
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kyt68xBL411qau028o1_500.jpg)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa66/dracolupus/friends1.jpg)
^Twid,
Guilty of the anarchy thing, even if it is economy specific.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 12:58:36 AM
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa66/dracolupus/friends1.jpg)
^Twid,
Guilty of the anarchy thing, even if it is economy specific.
Villager always has that sinister-looking smile on her face. It isn't a happy smile, it's a BAD SMILE.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:39:38 AM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 12:58:36 AM
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa66/dracolupus/friends1.jpg)
^Twid,
Guilty of the anarchy thing, even if it is economy specific.
Villager always has that sinister-looking smile on her face. It isn't a happy smile, it's a BAD SMILE.
You know, I was thinking this, but I didn't want to say it.
Because I don't want her to hurt me.
Just at the other two people. The young lady looks like some sort of mind control is being used on her and her friend has to look of, "I have seen things and I am not allowed to speak of them"
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 23, 2012, 06:42:20 AM
Just at the other two people. The young lady looks like some sort of mind control is being used on her and her friend has to look of, "I have seen things and I am not allowed to speak of them"
WHAT MIND SORCERY ARE TWID AND VILLAGER PERFORMING???
Quote from: Nigel on January 23, 2012, 06:45:57 AM
Quote from: Don Coyote on January 23, 2012, 06:42:20 AM
Just at the other two people. The young lady looks like some sort of mind control is being used on her and her friend has to look of, "I have seen things and I am not allowed to speak of them"
WHAT MIND SORCERY ARE TWID AND VILLAGER PERFORMING???
Something involving metals I think. I shall inform the Pope. Ready the exorcism tables and knives.
:lol: The other dude is villagers old roommate who currently lives in pboenix. This was his going away party so he was probably having haunting visions of the things that lay ahead. Hes been gone about a year and is already planning on moving back to boston. The other woman is villagers blind friend who is mischievous as fuck. She also doesnt take shit from anyone and will tear you a new one.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 03:49:28 PM
:lol: The other dude is villagers old roommate who currently lives in pboenix.
You...
You
bastards.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:37:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 03:49:28 PM
:lol: The other dude is villagers old roommate who currently lives in pboenix.
You...
You bastards.
Not my doing. He got a nifty promotion at work and was moved out there at the company's expense.
And then his job involved a lot of travel to the East Coast. Yep. Makes a lot of sense to me. That's part of the reason that he wants to transfer back to the Massachusetts branch.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:42:32 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:37:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 03:49:28 PM
:lol: The other dude is villagers old roommate who currently lives in pboenix.
You...
You bastards.
Not my doing. He got a nifty promotion at work and was moved out there at the company's expense.
And then his job involved a lot of travel to the East Coast. Yep. Makes a lot of sense to me. That's part of the reason that he wants to transfer back to the Massachusetts branch.
Anyway, we'll be there in May it seems, and Enabler wants to meet Villager based entirely on that smile.
You and I? We're fucked.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:46:20 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:42:32 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:37:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 03:49:28 PM
:lol: The other dude is villagers old roommate who currently lives in pboenix.
You...
You bastards.
Not my doing. He got a nifty promotion at work and was moved out there at the company's expense.
And then his job involved a lot of travel to the East Coast. Yep. Makes a lot of sense to me. That's part of the reason that he wants to transfer back to the Massachusetts branch.
Anyway, we'll be there in May it seems, and Enabler wants to meet Villager based entirely on that smile.
You and I? We're fucked.
:)
Yep. Definitely. I can't see any good coming out of this, but I'm still in favor of it.
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
We'll be staying in Providence (We've received an offer of hospitality, which we have gratefully accepted, as no hotel bill means more fun), but I expect we'll be hitting the Purple Line a few times, and dragging our hostess with us.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:10:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
We'll be staying in Providence (We've received an offer of hospitality, which we have gratefully accepted, as no hotel bill means more fun), but I expect we'll be hitting the Purple Line a few times, and dragging our hostess with us.
Fo sho. Even still, it gives me more freedom of movement, so if you all decide to do something crazy, I can be down there in about an hour.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:10:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
We'll be staying in Providence (We've received an offer of hospitality, which we have gratefully accepted, as no hotel bill means more fun), but I expect we'll be hitting the Purple Line a few times, and dragging our hostess with us.
Fo sho. Even still, it gives me more freedom of movement, so if you all decide to do something crazy, I can be down there in about an hour.
Well, we have precisely two plans so far:
1. Hit the clam shack, and
2. Boston for a day or three.
Please note that TGG will be with us, and there won't be any leaving her sit while we go to a club or anything like that. Besides, I can see that shit here, right? And it's not like anyone wants to see TGRR drunk.
So we find other entertainment. We're creative bastards, we can do this.
Cool with me man.
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:39:24 PM
Cool with me man.
It was a total lie about being able to see that shit here, by the way. Our music scene is hard to describe to people who are too young to remember Lawrence Welk.
Lol its all good. What sucks about here is that its almost all 21 plus and the rest is 18 plus. You cant see shit in boston if you cant buy a porno mag.
There's a chance we'll be doing a job in Woods Hole around that time.
The universe will probably activate its defense mechanisms again and kick me out to Greenland or something.
Quote from: Fuck You One-Eye on January 23, 2012, 06:55:35 PM
There's a chance we'll be doing a job in Woods Hole around that time.
The universe will probably activate its defense mechanisms again and kick me out to Greenland or something.
Don't they issue you guys anchors?
Yes, but it's a point of pride to never have to use one.
An anchor on a ship like this is sort of like seatbelts on airplanes.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:36:19 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:10:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
We'll be staying in Providence (We've received an offer of hospitality, which we have gratefully accepted, as no hotel bill means more fun), but I expect we'll be hitting the Purple Line a few times, and dragging our hostess with us.
Fo sho. Even still, it gives me more freedom of movement, so if you all decide to do something crazy, I can be down there in about an hour.
Well, we have precisely two plans so far:
1. Hit the clam shack, and
2. Boston for a day or three.
Please note that TGG will be with us, and there won't be any leaving her sit while we go to a club or anything like that. Besides, I can see that shit here, right? And it's not like anyone wants to see TGRR drunk.
So we find other entertainment. We're creative bastards, we can do this.
Let me know the dates, maybe we can do lunch or something.
Awwww, I wanna hang out with the cool kids in Boston... :(
Im not opposed to your attendance.
Fuck that noise, cool kids hang out TRONE!
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 23, 2012, 08:41:39 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:36:19 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:15:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 06:10:57 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 06:01:28 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:59:54 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 23, 2012, 05:55:40 PM
Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 23, 2012, 05:49:04 PM
Also, will make sure I don't make any major travel plans around that time.
We'll have exact dates by midweek.
Shweet!
I've been trying to get ahold of Richter, but he's been too busy beating people up 3 nights a week.
:lol:
Well, on the bright side, I will have a car by then (by Friday actually), so we'll be able to randomly show up at his doorstep if necessary.
We'll be staying in Providence (We've received an offer of hospitality, which we have gratefully accepted, as no hotel bill means more fun), but I expect we'll be hitting the Purple Line a few times, and dragging our hostess with us.
Fo sho. Even still, it gives me more freedom of movement, so if you all decide to do something crazy, I can be down there in about an hour.
Well, we have precisely two plans so far:
1. Hit the clam shack, and
2. Boston for a day or three.
Please note that TGG will be with us, and there won't be any leaving her sit while we go to a club or anything like that. Besides, I can see that shit here, right? And it's not like anyone wants to see TGRR drunk.
So we find other entertainment. We're creative bastards, we can do this.
Let me know the dates, maybe we can do lunch or something.
I'd certainly hope so. I got to talk to you for a grand total of like 30 minutes last time.
I mostly remember laughing a lot. And ordering several pitchers of beer.
If you're waiting for Richter to finalize dates, I will poke home somewhere squishy tonight and remind him to retrieve his phone from whatever hole he has it stashed in and call you.
This is gonna be a blast!
Quote from: Luna on January 24, 2012, 03:56:25 PM
If you're waiting for Richter to finalize dates, I will poke home somewhere squishy tonight and remind him to retrieve his phone from whatever hole he has it stashed in and call you.
This is gonna be a blast!
Dates are actually gonna be finalized based on TGG's school end date.