Fuck the government and everyone who supports what they're up to. The only reason they're still around is because people still think voting works and we're too lazy to overthrow them.
Fuck the government and everyone who supports what they're up to. The only reason they're still around is because people still think voting works and we're too lazy to overthrow them.
As opposed to what other form of government?
If you say "anarchy", then I feel compelled to mention how in an anarchist community there would be no government protection against my shooting you in the face and setting your house on fire.
If you say "anarchy", then I feel compelled to mention how in an anarchist community there would be no government protection against my shooting you in the face and setting your house on fire.
Actually anarchy would be kind of like 17th century Rhode Island, alternatively known as, and I quote, "The Pisspot of America" to our founding countrymen.
Actually anarchy would be kind of like 17th century Rhode Island, alternatively known as, and I quote, "The Pisspot of America" to our founding countrymen.
I always thought that was Detroit? or was that Delaware?
If you say "anarchy", then I feel compelled to mention how in an anarchist community there would be no government protection against my shooting you in the face and setting your house on fire.
Since he seems to have left for the night (or at least for a while), I think the comrade's main issues are that voting matters little relative to corporate lobbying, and specifically related to SOPA, that old people who don't know what they're talking about shouldn't be making laws about things like the internet, and if they do, they shouldn't be making those decisions based on what the people with the deepest pockets tell them to do.
That's just the impression I get from the guy, though.
Which are valid arguments, but to say "fuck the government" and suggest the need for its overthrow (which I took to mean that the democratic republic form of government as a whole is fail and must be dropped) is a bit much.
The problem with running for public office is that anyone who is qualified knows well enough not to run, and that our Constitution has designed our federal government such that at most only a third of the legislative branch can be voted out at any one time.
I always thought that was Detroit? or was that Delaware?
Both have their share of negatives. Detroit is still in the midst of them rhode island basically said sod off to central government and ran itself like ancient Greece city states. Packed with Quakers and criminals.
Actually, I just meant this government. Constitutional Republicism is really a pretty good system, but our current rulers are whores and traitors with their hearts in the pockets of corporate interests. They need to be excised from power, along with the bankers and executives, and replaced with laws introduced to keep this shit from happening again.
About Nintendo, Sony and EA who "quietly dropped their support of SOPA"? Well, they have not changed their position on SOPA. In fact, they apparently never supported it in the first place; they only said, "Please do something!" before SOPA was proposed.
Also, nobody likes Anonymous, not even the "oldfags" on 4chan.
Indeed. For personal info to have been compromised on the PSN once does give me pause when considering buying a PS3, but despite Sony's seeming ineptitude, I'm not mad at them like I am at the stupid jerks who have nothing better to do than to crap on the lives of innocent gamers.
For the PSN to have been attacked repeatedly, along with and other Sony-related sites is just mean.
How are you winning the minds and hearts of the public with this, Anonymous?? HOW??
The thing is, not only are they harming the companies they're directing it to, they're also harming the good nature of the gamers themselves. Not to mention they'll be sabotaging themselves, seeing as this would only give companies more incentive to support SOPA. We're trying to prevent that, not bring it about.
Can you imagine a world without Google or Facebook? If plans to protest the potential passing of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) come to fruition, you won’t need to; those sites, along with many other well-known online destinations, will go temporarily offline as a taste of what we could expect from a post-SOPA Internet.
Companies including Google, Facebook, Twitter, PayPal, Yahoo! and Wikipedia are said to be discussing a coordinated blackout of services to demonstrate the potential effect SOPA would have on the Internet, something already being called a “nuclear option” of protesting.
I don't know about you guys but this would one heck of a productive day for me. Not only that but it's something so big and tramatic that it would be unheard of for the media to shed light on it.
I don't know about you guys but this would one heck of a productive day for me. Not only that but it's something so big and tramatic that it would be unheard of for the media to shed light on it.
What disturbs me about ICE is the warehouses of confiscated items full of...purses. And jerseys. Doesn't the FBI have more important things to do with their time than fill warehouses with perfectly good items? It really pains me to see so much stuff go to waste. Sure, the fake drugs should be thrown out since they're dangerous, but the rest of the stuff seems perfectly harmless.
And really, a cheap knockoff of a Prada purse or something is not the same thing. AT ALL. People buy expensive luxury goods at high prices for the distinction of having something that other people can't afford...not because of the way it looks. They wouldn't buy the fakes because they're sold at a lower price, and thus the bragging rights wouldn't be there. I mean, how many people would go and buy a cheap second-hand car that looks like a Lamborghini so that they could tell people how rich they were if they could actually afford a real Lamborghini? Makes no sense.
It sorta reminds me of the Ultra Luxe bit from Fallout where that lady says that while she'd just love for there to be enough steaks for everyone it would ruin the exclusivity if everyone could have steak.
What disturbs me about ICE is the warehouses of confiscated items full of...purses. And jerseys. Doesn't the FBI have more important things to do with their time than fill warehouses with perfectly good items? It really pains me to see so much stuff go to waste. Sure, the fake drugs should be thrown out since they're dangerous, but the rest of the stuff seems perfectly harmless.
And really, a cheap knockoff of a Prada purse or something is not the same thing. AT ALL. People buy expensive luxury goods at high prices for the distinction of having something that other people can't afford...not because of the way it looks. They wouldn't buy the fakes because they're sold at a lower price, and thus the bragging rights wouldn't be there. I mean, how many people would go and buy a cheap second-hand car that looks like a Lamborghini so that they could tell people how rich they were if they could actually afford a real Lamborghini? Makes no sense.
It sorta reminds me of the Ultra Luxe bit from Fallout where that lady says that while she'd just love for there to be enough steaks for everyone it would ruin the exclusivity if everyone could have steak.
You called?
People actually do buy cheap knockoffs without realizing it. Beside scamming the customer it potentially devalues the original product.
People actually do buy cheap knockoffs without realizing it. Beside scamming the customer it potentially devalues the original product.
I mentioned the devaluing thing in my post. The real reason these goods are being confiscated is because the people who can afford the actual product don't want people who can't afford it to have something that looks like it. And I'm saying that I don't think that's the case. The real product will still be better because it costs more.
As an example, my grandpa, a wine connoisseur, has sampled a large variety of champagne and found a little known brand that he says is absolutely fantastic. But when New Years Eve comes around, he doesn't go and buy this little brand, he buys Dom Perignon instead. He does this even though he also insists that they taste exactly the same. Why? Because you pay for the label not the product. You pay for the fact that you're paying more and you can show people that you can afford to blow two hundred and fifty dollars on a single bottle of bubbly. Same reason for buying diamonds when you could buy nicely cut glass for a few bucks.
As for people getting confused... well, if they jump at buying a big brand name purse for $45, they wouldn't have bought the real deal anyways.
I would like to know which one this is. I'm not disputing you, I just want to try it.
Honestly, I can't remember what it was called. My mom thinks it's Cristal, but that's actually MORE expensive than Dom Perignon, so I don't think that's it. I'll have to ask my grandpa when I see him again.
What disturbs me about ICE is the warehouses of confiscated items full of...purses. And jerseys. Doesn't the FBI have more important things to do with their time than fill warehouses with perfectly good items? It really pains me to see so much stuff go to waste. Sure, the fake drugs should be thrown out since they're dangerous, but the rest of the stuff seems perfectly harmless.
And really, a cheap knockoff of a Prada purse or something is not the same thing. AT ALL. People buy expensive luxury goods at high prices for the distinction of having something that other people can't afford...not because of the way it looks. They wouldn't buy the fakes because they're sold at a lower price, and thus the bragging rights wouldn't be there. I mean, how many people would go and buy a cheap second-hand car that looks like a Lamborghini so that they could tell people how rich they were if they could actually afford a real Lamborghini? Makes no sense.
It sorta reminds me of the Ultra Luxe bit from Fallout where that lady says that while she'd just love for there to be enough steaks for everyone it would ruin the exclusivity if everyone could have steak.
This is why I hate IP enforcement. It's just rich assholes making the government suck them off. The sooner that system goes to pieces the better. I do agree, however, that medical enforcement is a worthwhile endeavor. Big Pharma might do some truly awful stuff, but there's no excuse to give people chalk pills.
This is another reason why I think my mother is wrong. I would have remembered it if it were a well-known brand. When I find out what it was, I'll be sure to post it on the forums though.
This is another reason why I think my mother is wrong. I would have remembered it if it were a well-known brand. When I find out what it was, I'll be sure to post it on the forums though.
I mentioned the devaluing thing in my post. The real reason these goods are being confiscated is because the people who can afford the actual product don't want people who can't afford it to have something that looks like it. And I'm saying that I don't think that's the case. The real product will still be better because it costs more.
It devalues the product beyond the illusory missed sales though. As you said, the whole point of these luxury brands is the exclusivity, the fact that not everyone can afford them. If suddenly every old chav on the street is toting your status symbol of choice (fake as those ones may be), it definitely tarnishes the prestige. If you have to tell people "but mine is real", it's like... so what? You pay through the nose to carry essentially the same thing-holder as that bag lady who pulled her monogrammed LV Boulogne out of a dumpster? Congratulations, what a spectacular waste of money.
It devalues the product beyond the illusory missed sales though. As you said, the whole point of these luxury brands is the exclusivity, the fact that not everyone can afford them. If suddenly every old chav on the street is toting your status symbol of choice (fake as those ones may be), it definitely tarnishes the prestige. If you have to tell people "but mine is real", it's like... so what? You pay through the nose to carry essentially the same thing-holder as that bag lady who pulled her monogrammed LV Boulogne out of a dumpster? Congratulations, what a spectacular waste of money.
In the area I live up north, you'd probably be safer if everyone thought your bag or whatever was a fake...
In any case, this is a case of our government pandering to the rich and the desire to be exclusive. Now, if these items were circumventing customs and being smuggled into the country, that would be a problem. But as far as I can see from that video, they aren't. And you know, maybe it's a good thing that people are seeing how these exclusive products can be so easily replicated. Maybe it will force the brand names to be more innovative and create better products that can't be so easily reproduced.
Or maybe they could complain to the government and just maintain the status quo. But, as a favorite character of mine says: "The status is NOT quo."
To an extent I agree, and to another extent, I want people to be prosecuted for making faux Docle and Gabbana products. Because I paid good money for mine.
Comments
As opposed to what other form of government?
If you say "anarchy", then I feel compelled to mention how in an anarchist community there would be no government protection against my shooting you in the face and setting your house on fire.
So it would be like Arkham City?
Actually anarchy would be kind of like 17th century Rhode Island, alternatively known as, and I quote, "The Pisspot of America" to our founding countrymen.
I always thought that was Detroit? or was that Delaware?
Since he seems to have left for the night (or at least for a while), I think the comrade's main issues are that voting matters little relative to corporate lobbying, and specifically related to SOPA, that old people who don't know what they're talking about shouldn't be making laws about things like the internet, and if they do, they shouldn't be making those decisions based on what the people with the deepest pockets tell them to do.
That's just the impression I get from the guy, though.
The problem with running for public office is that anyone who is qualified knows well enough not to run, and that our Constitution has designed our federal government such that at most only a third of the legislative branch can be voted out at any one time.
Both have their share of negatives. Detroit is still in the midst of them
I thought that it was New Jersey.
(Shame that most people in general are also self-serving idiots and will blindly follow those that tell them what they want to hear...
Democracy is the theory that holds that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. ~ H.L. Mencken
We can do it. It's called a revolution and it doesn't take TOO many people to do right.
In any case, friends, here is a list of common website IPs to use in case of SOPA. Fuck you, Washington. I'mma still Internet, you fascist assholes.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120103/00304017255/no-sony-electronics-nintendo-ea-have-not-publicly-changed-their-position-sopa.shtml
Even if nothing happens, this still seems like a good idea anyways.
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/01/03/anonymous-bullies-sony-and-nintendo-over-sopa-support
Good. Supporters of that bill deserve all the bullying we can give them.
Also, nobody likes Anonymous, not even the "oldfags" on 4chan.
And before you ask, yes, it's the "newfags" who do this bullshit.
Indeed. For personal info to have been compromised on the PSN once does give me pause when considering buying a PS3, but despite Sony's seeming ineptitude, I'm not mad at them like I am at the stupid jerks who have nothing better to do than to crap on the lives of innocent gamers.
For the PSN to have been attacked repeatedly, along with and other Sony-related sites is just mean.
How are you winning the minds and hearts of the public with this, Anonymous?? HOW??
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6348222.html?tag=newsticker%3Bheadline%3B2
Also, SOPA loses steam with Hollywood Union Members. Sweet.
http://www.webpronews.com/sopa-loses-steam-with-hollywood-union-members-2012-01
I don't know about you guys but this would one heck of a productive day for me. Not only that but it's something so big and tramatic that it would be unheard of for the media to shed light on it.
SUPPORT THE BLACKOUT!!! (best link I could find.)
Fantastic. I've been hoping they would do that.
Huge supporter of stronger copyright law, Grover Norquist, is backing away from SOPA
And in other news, Rep. Lamar Smith decides that lying about, insulting and dismissing opposition to SOPA is the winning strategy! Weak! :mad:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120108/00322817330/did-mitt-romney-just-come-out-against-sopapipa.shtml
http://paulryan.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=274134
That idiot ICE film pats itself on the back for censoring the web, and it promises much more to come, which is even worse! :mad:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120106/03474817298/ice-propaganda-film-pats-itself-back-censoring-web-promises-much-more-to-come.shtml
And really, a cheap knockoff of a Prada purse or something is not the same thing. AT ALL. People buy expensive luxury goods at high prices for the distinction of having something that other people can't afford...not because of the way it looks. They wouldn't buy the fakes because they're sold at a lower price, and thus the bragging rights wouldn't be there. I mean, how many people would go and buy a cheap second-hand car that looks like a Lamborghini so that they could tell people how rich they were if they could actually afford a real Lamborghini? Makes no sense.
It sorta reminds me of the Ultra Luxe bit from Fallout where that lady says that while she'd just love for there to be enough steaks for everyone it would ruin the exclusivity if everyone could have steak.
You called?
People actually do buy cheap knockoffs without realizing it. Beside scamming the customer it potentially devalues the original product.
I mentioned the devaluing thing in my post. The real reason these goods are being confiscated is because the people who can afford the actual product don't want people who can't afford it to have something that looks like it. And I'm saying that I don't think that's the case. The real product will still be better because it costs more.
As an example, my grandpa, a wine connoisseur, has sampled a large variety of champagne and found a little known brand that he says is absolutely fantastic. But when New Years Eve comes around, he doesn't go and buy this little brand, he buys Dom Perignon instead. He does this even though he also insists that they taste exactly the same. Why? Because you pay for the label not the product. You pay for the fact that you're paying more and you can show people that you can afford to blow two hundred and fifty dollars on a single bottle of bubbly. Same reason for buying diamonds when you could buy nicely cut glass for a few bucks.
As for people getting confused... well, if they jump at buying a big brand name purse for $45, they wouldn't have bought the real deal anyways.
I would like to know which one this is. I'm not disputing you, I just want to try it.
Honestly, I can't remember what it was called. My mom thinks it's Cristal, but that's actually MORE expensive than Dom Perignon, so I don't think that's it. I'll have to ask my grandpa when I see him again.
I'm always bitter.
This is why I hate IP enforcement. It's just rich assholes making the government suck them off. The sooner that system goes to pieces the better. I do agree, however, that medical enforcement is a worthwhile endeavor. Big Pharma might do some truly awful stuff, but there's no excuse to give people chalk pills.
This is another reason why I think my mother is wrong. I would have remembered it if it were a well-known brand. When I find out what it was, I'll be sure to post it on the forums though.
It devalues the product beyond the illusory missed sales though. As you said, the whole point of these luxury brands is the exclusivity, the fact that not everyone can afford them. If suddenly every old chav on the street is toting your status symbol of choice (fake as those ones may be), it definitely tarnishes the prestige. If you have to tell people "but mine is real", it's like... so what? You pay through the nose to carry essentially the same thing-holder as that bag lady who pulled her monogrammed LV Boulogne out of a dumpster? Congratulations, what a spectacular waste of money.
In the area I live up north, you'd probably be safer if everyone thought your bag or whatever was a fake...
In any case, this is a case of our government pandering to the rich and the desire to be exclusive. Now, if these items were circumventing customs and being smuggled into the country, that would be a problem. But as far as I can see from that video, they aren't. And you know, maybe it's a good thing that people are seeing how these exclusive products can be so easily replicated. Maybe it will force the brand names to be more innovative and create better products that can't be so easily reproduced.
Or maybe they could complain to the government and just maintain the status quo. But, as a favorite character of mine says: "The status is NOT quo."