Hitler reacts to SOPA

[JWR]

Some of may have already seen this.
Couldn't get it to embed???



http://youtu.be/uvXo4sGB7zM

[Gz Rider]

...

[Water Warrior 2]

There are a large number of folks out there who have a sense of entitlement and do not want to pay for anothers efforts to create or educate. Plain and simple theft.

[JWR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Opponents say the proposed legislation threatens free speech, innovation, and enables law enforcement to block access to entire internet domains due to infringing material posted on a single blog or webpage.

Have you been following this???


This was not a thought out bill, but a blanket rights bill for BIG BROTHER.

Good idea, bad wording.

This web site could very well be one that is in violation.

[mole2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Opponents say the proposed legislation threatens free speech, innovation, and enables law enforcement to block access to entire internet domains due to infringing material posted on a single blog or webpage.

Have you been following this???

And it does not require proof. They can shut down a site on accusation. Copyright laws are just that. If you feel or have proof of copyright infringement then take the offender to court. That is the way laws are supposed to work. With SOPA all that is needed is a complaint from RIAA, etc and the site gets shut down. Kinda like guilty until proven innocent.


:)

[JWR]

Here is a prime example.

http://www.smoothharold.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/spoon.jpg

I just broke the law and Dupo would have to shut downand go to court and pay fines.


An analysis in the information technology magazine eWeek stated, "The language of SOPA is so broad, the rules so unconnected to the reality of Internet technology and the penalties so disconnected from the alleged crimes that this bill could effectively kill e-commerce or even normal Internet use. The bill also has grave implications for existing U.S., foreign and international laws and is sure to spend decades in court challenges."[48]

Art Bordsky of advocacy group Public Knowledge similarly stated, "The definitions written in the bill are so broad that any US consumer who uses a website overseas immediately gives the US jurisdiction the power to potentially take action against it."[49]

On October 28, 2011, the EFF called the bill a "massive piece of job-killing Internet regulation," and said, "This bill cannot be fixed; it must be killed."[50]


Brooklyn Law School professor Jason Mazzone warned, "Much of what will happen under SOPA will occur out of the public eye and without the possibility of holding anyone accountable. For when copyright law is made and enforced privately, it is hard for the public to know the shape that the law takes and harder still to complain about its operation.

[mrlmd1]

This bill goes way too far. Wikipedia could be shut down for even referencing a site that has downloads. Monster wanted Craigslist shut down because if someone wanted to sell a used speaker cable, that infringes on their ability and rights to sell new ones. Again, big corporations lobbying to control everything, and a great number of the ill-informed congressman who originally supported this without knowing what it was really about, overnight changed their minds when they got educated. There are plenty of good laws on the books about copyright infringement, and this was not one of them.

[Gz Rider]

...

[JWR]

Real simple, Government, Lawyers, and Liability. That's the problem not the answer.

If the liability became too great, Dupo would shut this place down, and many more site would also go.

You would be left to see and read what Big Brother wanted you to see and nothing more.


Again:

This was not a thought out bill, but a blanket rights bill for BIG BROTHER.

Good idea, bad wording.

[Gz Rider]

...

[JWR]

I think we see from the reaction of congress on this issue that the people still rule. If we really lived in the world of big brother (I'm not saying that some aspects don't exist) the bill would be law by now. Even if the law was passed, if it did shut down the interenet as suggested, I think it would be repealed.

In the 80's a question was posed regarding the recording of television broadcasts. It was determined at that time (and I think the law still stands) that recording of broadcast TV (even broadcast movies)would not be a violation of copyrights. They had to shape new laws for the new technology (VCR'S).

I have alot of confidence that there is a way to protect copyrights online and allow most of the interent to continue.





Usually when a law is passed, there is so much hidden in said law, that an appeal would be so long and costly...won't happen.

What happened here was pro-active not reactive.

You know how the law makers are...We are right and you are wrong.


Remember it all comes down to MONEY.

[alantf]

You know how the law makers are...We are right and you are wrong.




I think this old post proves the point.

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=5341 (http://www.gz250bike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=5341)

[JWR]

You really don't know what that law coat tailed onto.

Just like pork spending, has nothing to do with the original bill.

Like these:
England

With the exception of carrots, most goods may not be sold on Sunday.
London Hackney Carriages (taxis/cabs) must carry a bale of hay and a sack of oats.

It is illegal to be drunk on Licensed Premises (in a pub or bar).
It is illegal for two adult men to have sex in the same house as a third person.
It is illegal to leave baggage unattended.
Picking up abandoned baggage is as act of terrorism.

It is illegal for a lady to eat chocolates on a public conveyance.

Any boy under the age of 10 may not see a naked mannequin.

A bed may not be hung out of a window.

No cows may be driven down the roadway between 10 AM and 7 PM unless there is prior approval from the Commissioner of Police.

Since 1313, MPs are not allowed to don armor in Parliament.

Any person found breaking a boiled egg at the sharp end will be sentenced to 24 hours in the village stock.

[alantf]

England

With the exception of carrots, most goods may not be sold on Sunday.


And you can buy a porno mag on a Sunday, but not a bible.

Over here,shops are only allowed to open on a Sunday in "tourist areas". When the cruise liners arrive in Santa Cruz on a Sunday (which most liners do), the passengers disembark, but all the shops are shut. Being designated as a "port" they can't open, so the shops lose all the custom, and the passengers have nowhere to go. Spanish logic? :cry:

[mrlmd1]

You can copy a movie off TV on a VCR, but you are not allowed to resell it. That's the point of copyright laws. If it's for your own personal use and it is broadcast free to watch with no charge, you are allowed to copy it. You cannot copy something which is not put out for free, for which there is a charge, like music or videos that are for sale, skirting around the purchase.

[Gz Rider]

...

[mole2]

You can copy a movie off TV on a VCR, but you are not allowed to resell it. That's the point of copyright laws. If it's for your own personal use and it is broadcast free to watch with no charge, you are allowed to copy it. You cannot copy something which is not put out for free, for which there is a charge, like music or videos that are for sale, skirting around the purchase.

That was my understanding.

My point was that there may be some sort of middle ground that could be found such as some quoting of copyrighted material if used on a non commercial website or something like that...

To me, there is no middle ground. You as the copyright holder have the courts at your disposal. To ask the taxpayers to pay via a new law is unjust. In the example above Dupo would have this domain blocked without any input except an accusation. It would be up to HIM to pursue as to why it is blocked and sue to have it reinstated. The obligation is then flipped from the copyright holder to another person who would have to pay. Think about what would happen on Ebay. All my listings contain pictures of products I sell. If, at a whim, the copyright holder complained, Ebay would be shut down.

Understand something. This is being forced by the RIAA et al and they DO have the money to pursue copyright infringements. The little guy they accuse doesn't so there is no basis for this law. I posted a video on Youtube of an afternoon ride with music to it. Under SOPA they could shut Youtube down for a perceived copyright infringement.


:)

[Gz Rider]

...

[mole2]

To me, there is no middle ground. You as the copyright holder have the courts at your disposal.

Yes but that is expensive. RIAA does not and will not defend every case of copyright infringement they serve only their clients in the recording industry but many other kinds of copyrights exist. Also why should RIAA make lawyers rich when a system of addressing the flagrant infringement that exists today would be so easy. If a site is posting music illegally, down goes the site. That won't happen because sites will start to monitor themselves better and if they don't then they deserve it.


In the example above Dupo would have this domain blocked without any input except an accusation. It would be up to HIM to pursue as to why it is blocked and sue to have it reinstated. The obligation is then flipped from the copyright holder to another person who would have to pay.

Who would you rather see have to pay, the victim of theft or a thief? The copyright holder has done NOTHING wrong. Why should the burden be on them? In JWR's example, my guess would be the site would not be shut down. If that risk did exist, Dupo (or other moderators) would carefully monitor postings to be sure copyrighted items are not being posted. (You do understand that those are the rules of this board already right?)

Think about what would happen on Ebay. All my listings contain pictures of products I sell. If, at a whim, the copyright holder complained, Ebay would be shut down.

If you take a picture of an item you own, my understanding is that is not a copyright infringement. If you go to the website of the company that produced that item and copy their picture onto your ad, that would be an infringement. The simple solution, take your own pictures.

Understand something. This is being forced by the RIAA et al and they DO have the money to pursue copyright infringements. The little guy they accuse doesn't so there is no basis for this law. I posted a video on Youtube of an afternoon ride with music to it. Under SOPA they could shut Youtube down for a perceived copyright infringement.

The music you posted for your own purposes belongs to someone else. They make music for a living. If anyone can take it for free then you are putting them out of business. I don't think you deserve the :skull: sentence for that but it was illegal. The fact that RIAA has money doesn't matter. They should not have to spend it when there is an easier way. If there are illegal things posted on youtube then what can I say, down it goes.

I think the purpose and focus of the bills was to say, we (the gubberment) understands the most people do not know or understand copyright law so we will put the burden onto website owners who do understand what is and isn't legal. Yes, the website owners object. Why would that surprise anyone? What we all want is to do whatever we want with no regulation- until of course someone steals from us.

You don't seem to grasp what SOPA is about. You have copyright and SOPA confused.

Let's use my video as an example. If the copyright holder of the music deems I violated their copyright they can take me to court to defend their copyright and have my video removed and be award compensation. That could be as little as small claims court with the intent of having the video taken down. Anyone can afford that.

Now comes SOPA. If ANYONE reports the video as copyright infringement (as mentioned above) then GZ250BIKE.COM will have it's domain blocked due to the link and YOUTUBE.COM will have it's domain blocked for hosting the video. Do you understand? It has nothing to do with who caused the copyright infringement. It allows the blocking of domains even if they are unaware of an infringement. It's basically guilty until proven innocent and the harm is done without proof.


:)

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[mole2]

You don't seem to grasp what SOPA is about. You have copyright and SOPA confused.

Let's use my video as an example. If the copyright holder of the music deems I violated their copyright they can take me to court to defend their copyright and have my video removed and be award compensation. That could be as little as small claims court with the intent of having the video taken down. Anyone can afford that.

Now comes SOPA. If ANYONE reports the video as copyright infringement (as mentioned above) then GZ250BIKE.COM will have it's domain blocked due to the link and YOUTUBE.COM will have it's domain blocked for hosting the video. Do you understand? It has nothing to do with who caused the copyright infringement. It allows the blocking of domains even if they are unaware of an infringement. It's basically guilty until proven innocent and the harm is done without proof.


:)

That was my exact understanding with which I have written all my posts on this thread. Where have I shown a lack of understanding?

Copyright=the right to use a given peice such as writing, music, movies, technical data, that a person has created.

SOPA=A bill to help prevent the theft of copyrighted material by punishing websites that fail to enforce copyright rules.

Right?

Wrong. A pirate site is already covered in the Digital act. SOPA is unneeded for that.

Again, you don't seem to understand. Copyright protects the intelectual property and gives recourse to an offender in the courts.

SOPA will punish not the person who infringes, but the web site where the links are and the hosts. They did nothing wrong. It's the person who violated the copyright who should and does get punished in court. The innocent operator, in this case Dupo, who is getting punished with SOPA.

by the way, the mere fact that I put music to my video WITHOUT getting financial compensation for it is not a violation of copyright. None the less if you complain under SOPA then GZ250BIKE goes down and Dupo did nothing wrong. He has to sue to get the site back up costing him.

I'm done with this because you have some twisted idea that SOPA is meant to help copyright holders which the copyright law already does. It does nothing but give the gov't control over inet content. If you're for that then have at it. The inet as you know it will disappear.


:)

[Gz Rider]

...

[Meme]

I have to agree with mole2. This was a run around attempt to give the government and the ultra rich more power. It was worded in a way to protect those with power and take from those without it. It puts the burden of proof on the accused, and they aren't even accused of doing something wrong, only of hosting what someone else did wrong. The looser in this whole scenario would be the American people and ultimately the entire world of internet users.

Plain and simple, if you think SOPA is good for the country, I think you are not paying enough attention.

[mole2]

I'm done with this...


If you don't want to discuss this, I certainly can't make you but my undertsanding of copyright and SOPA is not wrong as anyone reading this thread can see. I think you understand it as well.

I'm going to give this one more shot. SOPA/PIPA does NOT apply to domestic sites but rather it is for international sites. The copyright laws and the Digital Millinium Act (another bad law) are what applies to domestic sites. SOPA grants the US gov't the ability to have the domains of international sites removed from domestic name servers without any proof - just on the accusation - of copyright infringement. This grants the US gov't the same ability to filter international content that China uses to hinder information from reaching it's people. An example would be if someone in the UK were to post a link to a derogatory news artiicle about Obama on a UK site the US gov't can block the host of that site. If you're in favor of that then have at it.


:)

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[blaine]

Came across this today and thought I'd share it:

A Copyright Quickie: Canada Is About To Pass Sopa’s Evil Little Brother. Politely.


I’m a Canadian.

We’re a quiet bunch; prone to enjoying hockey, drinking stronger beer than our friends south of the border, and lovers of fries smothered in cheese curds and gravy.

We also, apparently, have an inferiority complex when it comes to being evil dirt bags, because we’ve decided to pass our very own version of SOPA up here.

Only better*

Meet Bill-C11. Formerly Bill C-32. (I think they thought if they made the number lower people would care less about it?)

Or as we call it up here; Her Royal Majesty V, Zzzzzzz

We like our politics dry up here.

But, as innocuous as it sounds, C-11 does a whole lot that SOPA did with a few extra twists you might not find in the Wikipedia write-up.

Like your PVR? You can’t keep it under C-11.

Like ripping CDs to your iPod? Say bye-bye.

Hey, do you want to be able to unlock your $500 smartphone and take it to a provider less dedicated to violating your wallet? That won’t be allowed either.

Did you get accused of internet piracy but no evidence has been presented and a trial date hasn’t even been set? Under C-11 your ISP will now be forced to terminate your internet access.

And people say that governments can’t be bought.

We’re not going to get Google or Wikipedia to go dark up here. We don’t have as robust a tech industry to act as a public counterbalance to entertainment industry interests. We have a Prime Minister (that’s French for Dear Leader under the current regime) who doesn’t give a suckling goat what the people think about his policies.

But we do have a lot more recourse in our political system to make politicians pay than our Yankee brethren do. (Yes I know I just insulted everyone south of the Mason Dixon line. I’m sorry. You trying caring about foreign geographical terminology when every person you’ve ever met from a particular country still thinks it’s the height of hilarity to ask if you live in an igloo.) We have things like votes of no confidence that can really bugger up a sitting House member’s day.
:roll: :cool:

[Gz Rider]

...

[greatmaul]

Part of the thing with sopa, and I agree that piracy hurts creative people, is that the bill can be used to shut down free speech. If someone on some website complains about a product or a corporation, then they can use this bill to easily have that entire website shut down. The end result of this is that websites will not allow posts which say anything negative about corporations, because they will not want to risk being shut down.

"The idea that we're going to preemptively have the government start censoring the Internet on behalf of giant corporations' economic interests, strikes me as exactly the wrong thing to do," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said in opposition to the bills, according to a Washington Post article.
from http://www.trumanindex.com/sopa-infringes-on-freedom-of-speech-1.2751849#.TyW0hcWJc_w

[greatmaul]

I am not at all familiar with the law you stated above (Digital Millenium Act) but if it does the same thing, as you say, domesticly that SOPA/PIPA would do, then I would ask, how are we still having the internet and a free exchange of ideas in the U.S.?

"Currently, such sites [like youtube] are protected by a provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides protection from prosecution as long as the sites take down infringing material as soon as it is pointed out. SOPA would demolish that immunity, holding massive sites hostage to governmental wrath." from http://www.trumanindex.com/sopa-infringes-on-freedom-of-speech-1.2751849#.TyW6SMWJc_x

[alantf]

Well.............. I've been reading this thread with great interest!!!!!!! Personally I don't give a FLYING F*CK about copyright. I just LOVE getting something for nothing - like music, films etc. I'm on a pitiful pension, so don't give a hoot about not giving a billionair corporation part of it. Carry on giving soulful reasons for protecting copyright while I give you the finger, and keep downloading. :2tup:

BTW, the more posts I see by GZ rider, the more certain I am that he's ER on a proxy server. Dunno why - it's just a feeling I've got. :mad:

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[Dupo]

I'll admit it. I've been downloading (pirating) since 1999.

Started with figuring out i can get music for FREE (napster). Downloading songs on 56k ... 6 minutes per song if you had a good connection!

Moved on to figuring out i can download programs with hacked serial numbers from websites (after going through some processes to get to the actual zip or rar file).

Moved on to downloading programs legally, then using crack software from crack/serial/keygen sites to unlock them.

Moved on to downloading with Limewire. Mostly songs, few programs.

Moved on to torrents after Limewire. Slow, unreliable...

Moved on to FTP downloading. Joined the largest "warez forum" on the net. Learned how to set up an FTP and share files between users. Also learned what happens when a company leaves anonymous logins on their FTPs ... utilizing 'dumps' for hundreds of files / movies / games etc. Used the warez forum to hone my pirating skills to get movies, games and learn how to hack/crack them.

Somewhere back there, learned how to mod my original xbox and download games for it.

Moved on to newsgroups. Usenet was the future of downloading. Once i learned this, i never looked back and still use it to this day. Speeds as fast as you can download, every file you could want. Movies available the day after they hit theater, games, full albums, console games ... you name it.

Have my xbox360 modded to play burned games and use newsgroups to download any game i want. Have my Wii softmodded with a 500gb HD attached to it to hold downloaded games.

Recently i jailbroke my iTouch and ran software to download paid apps for free.

Present day, i now hack my phone and tablet. both are running custom roms and I download 'paid' versions of apps for free with the help of app dumps, forums and such.

I've had $5000 3D creation software on here, Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, Sony Vegas... thousands and thousands of dollars of software. Some i use and delete, some i use and keep. I refuse to pay hundreds of dollars on photoshop or PSP. Overcharged because art schools pay premium prices (just like the govt overspending on toilet seats). 3DS max was 5 grand .. used to make Toy Story movie. I used it to skin 3d nascar race cars with custom paint jobs and create a section of track to make a 'nascar scene' showcasing my car art. Hardly worth 5 grand lol.

I am not against paying. I have paid for my 80s metal music 3x over already. First in vinyl, then cassette, then CD. If they think they are going to get me a 4th time for digital, they can kiss my ass. I have downloaded 200gb of 80s metal music. Very little 90s and very little new stuff. I wouldn't pay crap for anything new. Same crap i can listen to on the radio free ... i download free. I have no desire to buy anyone's album for their ONE hit song.

As for movies, i am not big on going to the theaters. Never was. Been there, seen some, not all that fun of an outing for me. I'd rather watch movies at home. Popcorn is cheap and so are drinks and i dont have to sit next to some stranger nor does my feet stick to the floor. I am also not one to watch a movie over and over and over. I seen it, i can talk about it, im good. A few years later, i'll watch it again, but certainly not enough to warrant me going to buy the dvd to sit on a shelf collecting dust. This is why i just download them. For what it costs to go see a movie ... bleh. I'll download it and watch it at home. 90% of the time, if i couldn't download it, i wouldn't bother going to the theater to watch it either.

xbox/wii/pc games ... My kids, as well as others have short attention spans. What is an awesome game 3 weeks ago, is now junk and something else new came out. Downloading, keeps them entertained and me free of spending life savings on video games.

I havent paid for games/movies/music/software in over 10 years. I love pirating. Do i ever pay for anything? Yes. I do go to some movies here and there. I do buy apps for my phone if they are THAT good and i would rather get updates quickly rather than wait for cracked versions. I do buy WebOs apps for my HP Touchpad (which is hacked to run android also). I've bought a handful of programs over the years. 1 or 2 were something i really needed, others were uncrackable but were that good i just paid for them.

Am I right in what i do? Depends who you ask.

[jonathan180iq]

I must admit, I have no moral problem with "pirating" things, especially music, and especially if I have already owned the song in the past but happened to lose the CD or some other crazy reason excuse.

In regards to games and movies, those things are already ridiculously overpriced anyway. To see something in the theatre, we're approaching $50 for a simple date. Buy them when they first come out, $25 bucks for the version that doesn't include special features. Go back later and buy the special feathers version for $30 and the basic version is now $15. Why play the game? I don't buy movies at all. And it's not like game pirating is a huge loss for those guys anyway because anything worth playing is already trapped into the crazy Microsoft Monopoly. Screw them. I'll do what I want when I want to and I'll use whatever means I want to do it. Does that make me irresponsible? Maybe a little, but only in the eyes of hardcore purists who buy into the idea that these "struggling" artists can't pay their bills because I listen to their music for free or that the mega-million dollar gaming and movie industries are doing right by overcharging for menial entertainment, or that following the lead of a monopolistic corporation is somehow a better pursuit than taking scraps from them....

If an independent artist comes out with something, I'll gladly pay for that. They live solely off of royalties. Bands like Metallica, for example....do they really need the .005 cents per song that they get from my purchase? It also usually works out that independent artists don't overcharge for well thought out music, while mainstream musicians will charge premium for their regurgitated pop-cultured muck.
PLUS, if I do find a hidden gem in the volumes of music that otherwise wouldn't be listened to, you had better believe that I tell everyone I know about the greatness of a song or the band behind it. And that is free advertising, which I deserve some credit for :) When I believe in something, I fully support it and get behind it and sell it. When I do not believe in something, I think it should be torn down, at least to an even playing field with everything and everyone else.

[Gz Rider]

...

[Gz Rider]

...

[jonathan180iq]

I don't know if it's necessarily a communistic mindset that leads to the motivation to take from those who have and give to those who have not, although everyone accepts that mentality from Robin Hood. And I also don't believe it's necessarily as simple as only a me-first mentality when it comes to getting things cheaply. After all, if I know how to work the legal part of the system to get more than would normally be given, especially in my my work for example, I share all of that information that I can with the general population and with clients that come into the office simply because it's the right thing to do.

The goal of any business is to get as much profit from a product as possible, regardless of real worth. And the goal of any consumer is to get as much of said product for the lowest possible cost. It's a game that is most easily visible every single day when people haggle over prices in street vendor scenes or flea markets and stuff like that.

What I rail against is a huge, mega-million dollar monopoly of a corporation completely dominating the market and pricing their products to a ridiculous profit margin. Should some of that agnst be focused more on the idiot consumer than on the organization itself? Perhaps. I mean, they wouldn't be "successful" if people would just stop buying the product. But at the same time, I can't target those people :) So I just do my own little thing and get some satisfaction from messing with the big dogs.

Like I said, that's probably irresponsible on my part. But it is what it is.

[Gz Rider]

...

[Water Warrior 2]

Piracy and the Occupy Movement.
If piracy is possible people will feel a sense of entitlement to getting something for free. Simple as that.
The occupy movement is a stupid move by a lot of folks. They live in tents, piss on the sidewalks and block normal folk from their daily errands and duties. Get a life I say. If you want all this stuff you don't have then get a job and work for it like I did. Demanding more and more from the government and big business without a fair trade in value is leading to the downfall of the economy. Greece and it's woes are a good example. The government itself gave till there was nothing left and then borrowed to keep up.

[Gz Rider]

...

[Water Warrior 2]

Good point WW. I felt there was some common thread to the way people in the occupy movement spoke and the discussion regarding SOPA. That common thread is as sense of entitlement. Don't anyone confuse this to think I am speaking of entitlements (social security, medicare, disability welfare ect.).

Society, mostly in the form of salesmen, magazine and television tries to tell us that we are entitled to the world. It does alot of damaged to alot of people.
Here is what I'm entitled to receive. Pension deductions that were paid by myself and a good employer for a lot of years to provide retirement income. Government pension deductions that were paid by me as an investment. Health Care that I pay monthly and also through taxes. I am entitled to drive/ride on public roads if I register/insure my wheels and pay road taxes. I am also entitled to NOT pick up hitch hikers who want a free ride in my truck on my road with my gas propelling the truck down the road. Too many folks want a free ride of some sort. Get rid of the free rides and put people to work.

[Gz Rider]

...

[jonathan180iq]

I have absolutely no problem with movements that get people working and earning their own keep. That needs to happen and the idea that people should receive unlimited welfare or benefits of any kinds because they are lazy is a death trap. I completely agree here.
There are people in my local economy, which, being mostly manufacturing, is still suffering greatly, who are still out of work after a year....2 years...3 years of "looking" for work. I think this is ridiculous. I can hold out for a $50,000 job because I'm educated, sure. Or, I could just accept whatever I can in the meantime to pay the bills and be responsible with things. Why people hold out for one particular type of job and then expect their benefits to last indefinitely, I just don't understand. I'm underemployed and underpaid. Why can't I just get the government to make up the difference between what I think I should earn and what I'm actually earning? For me, it's the same concept.

Now, that being said, it's also just as wrong for me to have to pay into something (like social security for example) all of my life and then one day be told that "Well, we mismanaged funds for the last 30 years so I'm not sure that we'll be able to pay that money back to you. Sorry. Have a nice life." I'm sure this is even worse when things like SS payments decrease for people who are so far along in age that they rely solely on that income and what little bit of retirement or savings they have left over. That's all kinds of wrong.

I am obligated to pay into a system that I have very little say-so in the day to day decision making. I would go so far as to say that I have virtually no say-so. Modern voting is such a sham and the people that we elect to represent us are so caught up in the actual job of politicking that the concept of representing your constituents is almost non-existent. The people who make the decisions that are going to affect us long term are so detached from the actual process that it's a wonder our government gets things signed in the first place. Our main media outlets are little more than entertainment stations populated by people who have vehement opinions on political matters but who have never actually solved or contributed to the solving of any problems. We are just so detached from that process and that system that the more I think about it, the more I just want to keep everything that I make for myself, live alone in the woods and practice self-reliance for the rest of my life.

But, alas, I am a spoiled little shit who really enjoys the modern comforts of things like roads and schools and grocery stores. So I cannot participate in this modern system unless I acquiesce to the way that it works, regardless of my real philosophical and political leanings.

Deep down, I am a communist, in the very purist sense of the word. Not a large government type commie, mind you. That's an oxymoron if I ever heard one and it's the reason that large-scale communism has never worked and will never work. I believe that everyone should have the same access to everything. Locally shared harvests, free bicycles, all basic necessities met regardless of circumstance. I believe that people have an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The right to life includes all the basic needs and everyone else around them should help them achieve that need, in the same way that they will help me achieve my needs. We should operate in a way that leaves no one overloaded with comforts while other people sleep in the cold or starve to death just because they weren't born in the most affluent region. It's a community of people taking care of each other like family.

I'm not naive enough to think that this is something that can be applied nationally. Nor do I think it's a fix for what's messed with the uber-capitalist system. Honestly, I'm just not smart enough to offer solutions to that. It's something that will only ever work in small scale local groupings. But it's also a mindset and philosophy that people can carry with them and apply as often as possible when dealing with other humans. And, in doing so, their daily motivations and future choices will reflect the empathy and interests of others as well as their own.

Oh my God! He said he was communist. I can't talk to him anymore.....
This is the exact frame of mind that motivates me to make sure all the knowledge on this forum is available to anyone who wants it, regardless of anything else. 1 post under your name or 7,259, you deserve access to the same data and body of knowledge and help as everyone else. :)


PS: I realize this is complete and utter rambling and doesn't at all keep on the topic of SOPA..... whoops.

[Gz Rider]

...

[jonathan180iq]

That last point is certainly true and something that really chaps my ass.
We have gotten to a point where we reclassify certain wants as societal or work-related needs.

No one on this planet, except for maybe first responders or doctors or something along those line, NEEDS a cell phone or some other type of fast-access personal communication device. No one NEEDS TV. No one NEEDS high speed internet. Yet when making budgets, for example, we see more often than not that those expenses are categorized under the heading of necessity. We won't budge when it comes to having instant access to our social media outlets.

Here's a quick little case in point that I was privy too over the long weekend.
My mom's husband had a diabetic crash while walking into his doctor's office last Thursday. He collapsed, passed out and was lying there in the rain for several minutes before anyone found him. When the EMT's arrived, his heart was shaking. It was no longer beating. He had to be shocked back to life and was immediately put on a ventilator because he wasn't breathing on his own. His body was convulsing and he was going into shut-down shock by the time they got him to the hospital. It was basically over.
As I sat with my mom in the waiting room and other friends of theirs were gathered around, she was obviously distraught. But you know what one of the first things she said was?

"I need to get on facebook to update my status..."

There's a real disconnect between the reality of situations and the interconnectedness that we feel with our virtual social realities. We have made the synthetic one the priority when it is, at the end of the day, merely synthetic and at the most basic level something that is simply not real. It's no surprise really, since we are so bombarded by the images and social message that THAT type of human interaction is the most legitimate. Turn on any news station and I'll bet you don't have to wait 3 minutes before you hear some wanna-be hip news anchor drop words like "Facebook", "Youtube", "Twitter", etc. They're all about it because our society has gotten to the point where all we do is have physical social gatherings so we can all sit in different chairs and fire up our laptops, get on our phones and message people that aren't actually with us.

It's a waste.

For the records, my mom's husband is fine. He is fully recovering and was taken out of ICU yesterday and moved to a more comfortable room.
All good stuff. But facebook has been blowing up with people putting forth absolutely no effort of support for them, other typing out a facebook post about how much they're "praying for you!"

[mrlmd1]

And I'm sure that really helps a lot (lol).

[Gz Rider]

...

[jonathan180iq]

The timing of everything is certainly eye-opening, that's for sure. I'm like "WTH, God?"

I just recently made the plunge and moved away from facebook. Cold turkey.
As you know, there are other factors involved right now but I don't think I'll ever go back.
You realize in times of emotional and financial hardship which people REALLY care about you and that gives you a great perspective on the fact that of the 237 people that pretended to be your friend, you have maybe 7 that matter.

[Gz Rider]

...

[jonathan180iq]

It's pretty amazing that people really believe they have that many people in their lives.... I don't think I even KNOW that many people.

[Water Warrior 2]

It's pretty amazing that people really believe they have that many people in their lives.... I don't think I even KNOW that many people.
And a large number of those are of no real value in your daily life. A German shepard and a walk everyday, now that is real value.