At some level, you must understand that this is wrong.

[Entitled]

"Piracy is theft." is always worth a good chuckle. Because at some level I expect the person to be smart enough to differentiate between personal copyright infringement (Civil), professional copyright infringement (Crime), and theft (Crime).

This is why this thread will not end well (not your opinion specifically FelixG but because you're going to get people commenting on "touchy" subjects that others will not agree with). I guarantee that a group of people will drown out the original intent on this thread to argue about a hot-button topic by page 2.

For example: I have to believe that people who pirate KNOW that they are doing something wrong but don't care because their self-gain is more important than the wrongness that they are doing. I believe that piracy is theft but people call it "copyright infringement" because that makes it better somehow in their mind.

See! Pandemonium already! Just wait until someone waltz in with a "All religion is followed by sheeples" comment

Just pray that someone doesn't mention abortion, we'd be dealing with the fallout for days.

Wait....I just said "abortion"...OH SHI-

Actually, I think the piracy debate and the abortion debate are VERY similar to each other in that regard, as they both involve two sides screaming at each other about ideas of basic human rights, and believe that their concept of "objective morality" must be obvious to everyone.

Abortion is to "Thou shalt not kill", what is piracy to "Thou shalt not steal". The conservative apologists of both establisments are using hyperbole to claim that a given action (abortion, birth control/ copyright infringement) is EXACTLY THE SAME as the parallel heinous sin (murdering babies/taking away property from others). So they both first assume that the other side fully supposts the heinous sin, and THEN claims that they must be lying, or deluding themselves to think that that is moral. ("You can't be seriously supporting child murder"/"you simply can't defend theft").

Meanwhile, the progressive sides are convinced that their opponents are just parroting old arbitarily made up dogma for the sake of protecting the status quo, and the only real concern is freedom ("freedom to your body"/"information wants to be free"), so their opponents are AGAINST FREEDOM.

Neither of these stances are consistent, but I think most of them actually believe in all of it. It's a kind of cognitive dissonance.

If you try to bring these claims to their logical extremes, most of these ideologues simply can't answer:

"If abortion is murder, do you think that all the 50 million abortions done in the USA in the past decades should be persecuted as child murder cases? If aborting damaged incest babies is still OK, then do you think that murdering disabled children is OK?"

To the copyright apologists, ask this:

"If an IP is literally an artist's property, that can be taken away from them, then that means that Fair Use should be just as illegal as taking your car for a joyride, right? As long as no tangible financial harm is caused, shouldn't all owners have the same protection?"

(for the other sides, invert it, with 3rd trimester abortions, and zero artist control over content)

Maybe some of the extremists will answer yes, but most of them will just ignore it, so they all keep their ridiculous hyperboles instead of addmitting that they are really just arguing about drawing a formal line on a subjective issue. (exactly HOW MUCH rights women and fetuses, or artists and audiences, should have).

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

The entire debate about how gaming should remain a closed off "nerd" thing, to only appeal to the very nichest of niches. Which sometimes (as in this past week) extends to include the sexism debate too, because by Jove, we can't go having cooties get all over our precious toys. And how we apparently need to crucify people who are 'pretending' to like the same hobby we like, because they're not 'real' gamers as if that's actually a thing that can be quantified.

I've never understood why that debate even exists considering the whole point in gaming is having a great experience and telling people about it, and potentially playing with friends. It's so odd to me, but then again I'm sure those friends have been through "the test" and have deemed themselves worthy of playing with them, and being in the club.

It's all so stupid.

that someone thought this thread would be a good idea.

Awwww....

How could you say that?

If only there was a silly post to break up the seriousness of this thread.

 

[Beffudled Sheep_v1legacy]

The entire debate about how gaming should remain a closed off "nerd" thing, to only appeal to the very nichest of niches. Which sometimes (as in this past week) extends to include the sexism debate too, because by Jove, we can't go having cooties get all over our precious toys. And how we apparently need to crucify people who are 'pretending' to like the same hobby we like, because they're not 'real' gamers as if that's actually a thing that can be quantified.

I've never understood why that debate even exists considering the whole point in gaming is having a great experience and telling people about it, and potentially playing with friends. It's so odd to me, but then again I'm sure those friends have been through "the test" and have deemed themselves worthy of playing with them, and being in the club.

It's all so stupid.

that someone thought this thread would be a good idea.

Awwww....

How could you say that?

If only there was a silly post to break up the seriousness of this thread.

How some people can believe that the moon is not made of cheese and is the lair of spiderman. I mean c'mon guys! its so super obvious!

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Asking for silliness snip!

How some people can believe that the moon is not made of cheese and is the lair of spiderman. I mean c'mon guys! its so super obvious!

Science people, apparently.

Thanks science for being such a buzz kill!

Also, anyone that uses the word 'sheeple' and thinks it's a good idea to use in an argument.

Why is that even a word?

I would argue that comparing people to sheep is insulting since sheep are smarter than humans most of the time.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

It's pretty much how I feel about people who are party line Libertarians. Their ideology has such a basic understanding of economics "freedom good, government bad". I honestly can't believe there are grown adults who don't realize economics is more complex than that.

edit- you might be a Libertarian and have a more complex understanding of economics than that. By party line Libertarian, I mean people who believe in the American Libertarian Party's platform in its entirety.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Basically, anything along the lines of this:
There are just some movies, actors/actreses, and directors that should never be called good or be mentioned among the cinema gods.

 

[370999]

snip

I think this is true but I am afriad that I don't share your optimism that the rest of the escapist community, particuarly as this thread goes, will stick to the perimiters of "things they believe others must be engaging in intellectual dishonesty to themaelves to justify" instead of taking it for a hyperbolic "positions you don't agree with".

 

[Beffudled Sheep_v1legacy]

Asking for silliness snip!

How some people can believe that the moon is not made of cheese and is the lair of spiderman. I mean c'mon guys! its so super obvious!

Science people, apparently.

Thanks science for being such a buzz kill!

Also, anyone that uses the word 'sheeple' and thinks it's a good idea to use in an argument.

Why is that even a word?

I would argue that comparing people to sheep is insulting since sheep are smarter than humans most of the time.

Bah, what do science people know? "Facts"? "Universal truths"? Pfffft big deal. I know opinions, which sre infinitely more entertaining

You say that because you are a sheeple probably (whats the singular for sheeple? Sheepson?) hiding among us enlightened, hipster, holier/smarter/more moral/sophisticated than thou elitist nerd kings!
[sub]Baaaaaaa![/sub]

 

[silver wolf009]

People who like MLP Not really. I wanted to start a flame war but didn't have the courage to follow through.

People who don't like MLP.

WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO GUYS!?

I'm a get mad bro!

I'm mad...

OT: Well, the big ones have been hit, so I guess I'll have to think one up...

I suppose anyone who still clings to Trickle Down Economics, and yes, there are bound to still be people who cling to Trickle Down, have to know it's wrong. It didn't work when we tried it guys.

 

[Hawk of Battle]

I got into a, erm, "discussion" the other day with a guy on the topic of wind turbines and their usage. He was attempting to posit that they should make them more efficient by having them close together so that one blows air into another and/or having some sort of fan to help each of them turn. I calmly tried to explain that physics does not work that way. He could not understand anything wrong with this idea not matter how I tried to explain it and the conversation ended with him simply saying, "well, they'll just have to break physics then won't they?"

I decided to give up there and go on with my day without thinking about this incident lest my brain melt on me.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Asking for silliness snip!

How some people can believe that the moon is not made of cheese and is the lair of spiderman. I mean c'mon guys! its so super obvious!

Science people, apparently.

Thanks science for being such a buzz kill!

Also, anyone that uses the word 'sheeple' and thinks it's a good idea to use in an argument.

Why is that even a word?

I would argue that comparing people to sheep is insulting since sheep are smarter than humans most of the time.

Bah, what do science people know? "Facts"? "Universal truths"? Pfffft big deal. I know opinions, which sre infinitely more entertaining

You say that because you are a sheeple probably (whats the singular for sheeple? Sheepson?) hiding among us enlightened, hipster, holier/smarter/more moral/sophisticated than thou elitist nerd kings!
[sub]Baaaaaaa![/sub]

What?!

How dare you sir!

Spoiler: I demand satisfaction!

I think you're the sheeple since you're suspiciously denying something in great detail.

 

[BreakfastMan]

I've seen people on this very website, before this past week's Jimquisition, who have said that gaming has been going downhill ever since it "went mainstream". I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean, to be honest, because the SNES and Super Mario were pretty damn 'mainstream' for their time.

Well, there is something to say for that. Gaming has changed to a point that certain genres aren't profitable anymore and have been left by the wayside. Games today are still good, but the variety that was present in the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube era and earlier has kind of disappeared. The variety in games today exist mostly in the smaller downloadable games, not the big studio productions.

This is more due to the overbloated budgets than the mainstream appeal though. Though the two probably go hand in hand; "We have a huge budget so whatever game we make better appeal to as wide an audience as possible for us to make all that money back."

I disagree with that assertion, good sir! I think there still exists great variety in games today; hell, I think there is more variety today than there was 10, 20 years ago. I mean, the big studios haven't had a great deal of variety, certainly, but there is a lot when you look at gaming outside of the biggest of the big. There are all sorts of different types of games of all sorts of different genres being released, it is just astounding.

Many genres have fallen out of favor, yes, there is no denying that. But, I think that is just how things go with our favorite past-time. Genres fall in and out of favor all the time. Adventure gaming essentially died in the early 2000's, but has experienced a fairly big comeback recently. Same with 2D platformers. They aren't as big as they once were, but they certainly aren't dead. I don't think genres falling in and out of favor is an indicator of diminished variety. It is just a sign of change.

 

[WanderingFool]

"Piracy is theft." is always worth a good chuckle. Because at some level I expect the person to be smart enough to differentiate between personal copyright infringement (Civil), professional copyright infringement (Crime), and theft (Crime).

This is why this thread will not end well (not your opinion specifically FelixG but because you're going to get people commenting on "touchy" subjects that others will not agree with). I guarantee that a group of people will drown out the original intent on this thread to argue about a hot-button topic by page 2.

For example: I have to believe that people who pirate KNOW that they are doing something wrong but don't care because their self-gain is more important than the wrongness that they are doing. I believe that piracy is theft but people call it "copyright infringement" because that makes it better somehow in their mind.

See! Pandemonium already! Just wait until someone waltz in with a "All religion is followed by sheeples" comment

Just pray that someone doesn't mention abortion, we'd be dealing with the fallout for days.

Wait....I just said "abortion"...OH SHI-

Actually, I think the piracy debate and the abortion debate are VERY similar to each other in that regard, as they both involve two sides screaming at each other about ideas of basic human rights, and believe that their concept of "objective morality" must be obvious to everyone.

Abortion is to "Thou shalt not kill", what is piracy to "Thou shalt not steal". The conservative apologists of both establisments are using hyperbole to claim that a given action (abortion, birth control/ copyright infringement) is EXACTLY THE SAME as the parallel heinous sin (murdering babies/taking away property from others). So they both first assume that the other side fully supposts the heinous sin, and THEN claims that they must be lying, or deluding themselves to think that that is moral. ("You can't be seriously supporting child murder"/"you simply can't defend theft").

Meanwhile, the progressive sides are convinced that their opponents are just parroting old arbitarily made up dogma for the sake of protecting the status quo, and the only real concern is freedom ("freedom to your body"/"information wants to be free"), so their opponents are AGAINST FREEDOM.

Neither of these stances are consistent, but I think most of them actually believe in all of it. It's a kind of cognitive dissonance.

If you try to bring these claims to their logical extremes, most of these ideologues simply can't answer:

"If abortion is murder, do you think that all the 50 million abortions done in the USA in the past decades should be persecuted as child murder cases? If aborting damaged incest babies is still OK, then do you think that murdering disabled children is OK?"

To the copyright apologists, ask this:

"If an IP is literally an artist's property, that can be taken away from them, then that means that Fair Use should be just as illegal as taking your car for a joyride, right? As long as no tangible financial harm is caused, shouldn't all owners have the same protection?"

(for the other sides, invert it, with 3rd trimester abortions, and zero artist control over content)

Maybe some of the extremists will answer yes, but most of them will just ignore it, so they all keep their ridiculous hyperboles instead of addmitting that they are really just arguing about drawing a formal line on a subjective issue. (exactly HOW MUCH rights women and fetuses, or artists and audiences, should have).

Ouuuuuuhhhhhh...

Thats an interesting way to view things. I know I would never have looked at both Abortion and Piracy as being so similur.

Me... I wonder why people cant figure out that when you have a Congress thats Republican, and a president thats Democrate, you're going to have friction.

 

[frizzlebyte]

I agree with everyone about racism/homophobia, but I think the deeper problem is people's lack of understanding of Ideology.

Ideology is something that humans cannot do without, our brains are hard-wired to look for patterns and extrapolate meaning and predict occurrences based on the patterns we see. So, ideology becomes something of a shortcut for us, allowing us to make some sense of this incredibly complex world.

On the other hand, when your ideology defies even the most contrived reason, you must be prepared to alter and make additions to the patterns that form your ideology. People tend to become emotionally invested in their ideologies over time, to the point were they resist changing them even if there is tremendous evidence to undermine their beliefs, whatever those beliefs may be.

Things like racism are merely symptomatic of this basic problem, and more to the point, you see these types of actions in people of every creed, if you look carefully.

It's amazing how many people get their hackles up over just expressing a general understanding of the opposing viewpoint. That's why I don't talk politics much any more, even though I enjoy it.

Actually the problem is they *don't* understand their view is simply wrong.

My fundamentalist Baptist uncle (who I thankfully see only once a year) said at Thanksgiving, "The sodomites planned this. They decided to get together and move to this state to swing the vote in their favor. Don't you think that's true?" Because to him there's just no way the issue could be about people who are in love wanting to share their lives with each other without the fear of being persecuted by ignorant assholes like him. It can't be about the desire of all people to live in security under the same set of rights. To my uncle, it really is a vast conspiracy to drive the world into evil and wickedness.

I told him he should put the word out, gather up his Christian friends, congregate together, and swing the vote the other way next election. "Strike a blow for the Lord," I said. "Build stronger communities. Stand together to promote your beliefs. Put your hand on the wheel and show the wicked they aren't gonna drive this bus off the cliff without a fight." He squirmed, clearly uncomfortable with the idea. This is a man who would happily stone homosexuals to death (actually he would prefer to talk others into doing it, I doubt he'd have the courage to do the deed), but he can't handle the idea of a peaceful solution. "I'm sorry, I must be confused," I said. "I thought Jesus -- whose name you praise quite often -- was a strong proponent of peace, mercy, and compassion? I thought God was the judge, not you."

So now he's a bigot *and* a hypocrite. Thing is, you could debate him all afternoon, demolishing every argument he makes, and it wouldn't make any difference. He'd just move to another chair and start in with someone else, "The sodomites planned this."

He's probably remembering Bleeding Kansas.

Something similar to his conspiracy did actually happen during the lead up to the civil war. Free-Staters and pro-slavery settlers moved into the territory after the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act to try and influence the vote for Kansas becoming a slave- or free-state. Some crossed the border before the vote with the sole intent of influencing it.

Although, I somehow doubt that happened with the gay marriage vote.

Nice work on calling him out by suggesting he do the same thing as he thinks the gays did. That was bad-ass like I've never seen. Also, the fact that he's a bigot and a hypocrite does not surprise me at all. I find that one's level of hypocracy is proportional to one's level of fundamentalism.

 

[Beffudled Sheep_v1legacy]

Asking for silliness snip!

How some people can believe that the moon is not made of cheese and is the lair of spiderman. I mean c'mon guys! its so super obvious!

Science people, apparently.

Thanks science for being such a buzz kill!

Also, anyone that uses the word 'sheeple' and thinks it's a good idea to use in an argument.

Why is that even a word?

I would argue that comparing people to sheep is insulting since sheep are smarter than humans most of the time.

Bah, what do science people know? "Facts"? "Universal truths"? Pfffft big deal. I know opinions, which sre infinitely more entertaining

You say that because you are a sheeple probably (whats the singular for sheeple? Sheepson?) hiding among us enlightened, hipster, holier/smarter/more moral/sophisticated than thou elitist nerd kings!
[sub]Baaaaaaa![/sub]

What?!

How dare you sir!

Spoiler: I demand satisfaction!

I think you're the sheeple since you're suspiciously denying something in great detail.

Why I never! That is the last straw sir! Have at you!

Spoiler: I demand honor!

Aha! But the true sheeple would try to pass off the blame to conform to the blame shifting masses! Therefore I say you are the very first sheeple! And the fattest!

 

[Relish in Chaos]

Whenever functionalists, the New Right, hardcore Republicans, and religious fundamentalists try to make a straight-faced argument that things were overall better back in the 1950s.

The homophobic argument against gay couples adopting being that they may raise them to be gay. Because straight couples never raise gay kids, right?

People who?ve read the Bible in full and still take it as a moral guide for life.

 

[lacktheknack]

That this is anything other than a "state views you believe strongly" thread.

(Lemme guess... Meta'ing is frowned on, isn't it?

 

[anthony87]

I got into a, erm, "discussion" the other day with a guy on the topic of wind turbines and their usage. He was attempting to posit that they should make them more efficient by having them close together so that one blows air into another and/or having some sort of fan to help each of them turn. I calmly tried to explain that physics does not work that way. He could not understand anything wrong with this idea not matter how I tried to explain it and the conversation ended with him simply saying, "well, they'll just have to break physics then won't they?"

I decided to give up there and go on with my day without thinking about this incident lest my brain melt on me.

Perhaps your friend is a reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaly big fan of Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagaan? They barely even have physics in that.

 

[lacktheknack]

Actually the problem is they *don't* understand their view is simply wrong.

My fundamentalist Baptist uncle (who I thankfully see only once a year) said at Thanksgiving, "The sodomites planned this. They decided to get together and move to this state to swing the vote in their favor. Don't you think that's true?" Because to him there's just no way the issue could be about people who are in love wanting to share their lives with each other without the fear of being persecuted by ignorant assholes like him. It can't be about the desire of all people to live in security under the same set of rights. To my uncle, it really is a vast conspiracy to drive the world into evil and wickedness.

I told him he should put the word out, gather up his Christian friends, congregate together, and swing the vote the other way next election. "Strike a blow for the Lord," I said. "Build stronger communities. Stand together to promote your beliefs. Put your hand on the wheel and show the wicked they aren't gonna drive this bus off the cliff without a fight." He squirmed, clearly uncomfortable with the idea. This is a man who would happily stone homosexuals to death (actually he would prefer to talk others into doing it, I doubt he'd have the courage to do the deed), but he can't handle the idea of a peaceful solution. "I'm sorry, I must be confused," I said. "I thought Jesus -- whose name you praise quite often -- was a strong proponent of peace, mercy, and compassion? I thought God was the judge, not you."

So now he's a bigot *and* a hypocrite. Thing is, you could debate him all afternoon, demolishing every argument he makes, and it wouldn't make any difference. He'd just move to another chair and start in with someone else, "The sodomites planned this."

Try the first-strike method: Show him the passage where the Pharisees drag an adulterous woman in front of Jesus and he says "Let him without sin cast the first stone". Then ask him for an interpretation.

With luck, you'll never see him again. Because as an apologist, there is nothing that ticks me off more than bad and indefensible apologetics.

 

[Evil Smurf]

Linux objectively is the best OS, OSX is too expensive and Microsoft is too complicated. So why will I buy a MacBook Pro next? I am part of the apple ecosystem.