From the "We were just trying to learn stuff" department

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by taustin

He openly advocates agreeing to a contract with no intention of living up to the agreement. To normal people, that's the definition of dishonesty.

How is that so different than every single person that uses Alf's tools?

As for other things too numerous to quote for the most relevance, I'll just throw this in:

I, myself, possess some unpopular ideas. None relevant to ebooks, so I won't bother listing them. However, no matter how badly I would like certain aspects of reality to be different, I live in the current reality, and that is what shapes my actions. Because I'm not running around acting out in civil disobedience, am I dishonest? A hypocrite? I don't believe so. Would sharing those ideas in a forum automatically mean I'm acting on them? No.

Granted, there have been people on this forum that advocate similar ideas to Giggles' that do so to justify their own actions (piracy, infringement), but they are generally pretty obvious. Some flat-out admit it. So far all I've seen from Giggles is ideas, but no evidence of action. I can't assume the latter due to the former.

[Nexutix]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Well, with countries like Nigeria why not just give the publisher a tax credit in his home country and make it part of foreign aid shelled out by that government to Nigeria?

Such aid makes a lot more sense than big money for project, when most of those funds disappear into the pockets of corrupt politicians, anyway. Books go straight to those who need them. But forced private donations on behalf of the textbook publishers are not acceptable.

How complex do you want to make this? Do you think the country has corruption free government? You cannot even be sure the books will reach 50% of unmet need.

[Nexutix]

OK, the topic of copyright infringement.

When industrial revolution started, the society shifted from peasant-master composition to a community with equitable resources and benefits of mass production. This mass prouction was driven primarily by monetary incentives. The profits of the company. It inspired, motivated and pushed humans to get creative, get innovative and we dreamt of an ingenious near-utopian society. But utopia is unnatural. Everything that comes into existence has to go. It has to vanish. It has to be replaced by someting else.

The replacement has partially completed. The information age, as we call it, is taking over industrialized countries. Some countries have completed this process. Developing ones are just starting to enter this phase.

Everything has a plateau. A plateau where growth slows down, then gradually it stops at some point. We have reached a plateu. The purpose of allowing monetary incentives has fulfilled the needs. It has, better than expected. Better than we ever imagined. While standing at the start of this plateau, we are tasting the other side of this coin. We are debating whether this coin has two sides or one? As truth always says, it has. It has two sides. It will always have two sides.

What do we do now? What do we do now as a community? We have to start something new. Something that will replace this. Sure it has been born. It was born long ago. Grwoing slowly. Creeping up behind the curtain to take over this mess. you know what it is. You are aleady using it at some time or other. Creative Commons. Open source. Public domain.

Now I will not enlist the huge list of texts, software, even hardware/tools, information, systems, media and what not in a way where people tell you: "Free for Humans". Use it for whatever purpose you like. Because we are one society. This will take over. It will get better with time. It is getting better with time. Better than the products withh monetary incentives. Time will answer.

We better stop beating dead horse, literally.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Diap's on firmer ground calling Giggleton delusional (though I'm not thrilled about the ad populum) because at least Diap's joking about the plausibility of his opponent's arguments and beliefs.

Considering Giggleton an "opponent" at all is where most people usually go wrong. I just assume he's chosen to purposely set me up so I can deliver the punchlines.

Zing!

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by Nexutix

OK, the topic of copyright infringement.

When industrial revolution started, the society shifted from peasant-master composition to a community with equitable resources and benefits of mass production. This mass prouction was driven primarily by monetary incentives. The profits of the company. It inspired, motivated and pushed humans to get creative, get innovative and we dreamt of an ingenious near-utopian society. But utopia is unnatural. Everything that comes into existence has to go. It has to vanish. It has to be replaced by someting else.

The replacement has partially completed. The information age, as we call it, is taking over industrialized countries. Some countries have completed this process. Developing ones are just starting to enter this phase.

Everything has a plateau. A plateau where growth slows down, then gradually it stops at some point. We have reached a plateu. The purpose of allowing monetary incentives has fulfilled the needs. It has, better than expected. Better than we ever imagined. While standing at the start of this plateau, we are tasting the other side of this coin. We are debating whether this coin has two sides or one? As truth always says, it has. It has two sides. It will always have two sides.

What do we do now? What do we do now as a community? We have to start something new. Something that will replace this. Sure it has been born. It was born long ago. Grwoing slowly. Creeping up behind the curtain to take over this mess. you know what it is. You are aleady using it at some time or other. Creative Commons. Open source. Public domain.

Now I will not enlist the huge list of texts, software, even hardware/tools, information, systems, media and what not in a way where people tell you: "Free for Humans". Use it for whatever purpose you like. Because we are one society. This will take over. It will get better with time. It is getting better with time. Better than the products withh monetary incentives. Time will answer.

We better stop beating dead horse, literally.

I think you ARE right. The point is, since we still HAVE money around it's the creator's choice of conditions under which a work may be obtained.
My point with gigs is he wants to take this freedom away.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by taustin

No, I'm pointing and laughing as your accusing me of what you do yourself. Your argument is silly, poorly constructed, and disconnected from the real world.

Funny, that is how I read all your arguments. You do not seem to understand simple arguments and seem to miss why your own arguments are bad. Well, I will stop reading your arguments since they are so bad.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by taustin

That is the most riduculous thing you've said so far, and given how ridiculous most of what you say has been ,that's a real accomplishment. You're becoming increasingly incoherent, too. I have only a vague idea what you're trying to say. I suspect you do, as well.

Argument from personal lack of knowledge. Or maye argument prom personal incredulity. Just more fallacies from you.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

How is that so different than every single person that uses Alf's tools?

Alf's tools can be used for non-infinging purposes. Giggle's isn't talking about stripping DRM so you can make device independent backups, he's talking about stripping DRM so you can pass the book on to others. He started a thread about creating a web site for that specific purpose, in clear violation of, say, Amazon's terms of service, and pretty likely violation of Title 17 (and if more than a certain amount of value is involved, $1500, IRRC, criminal violation).

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

As for other things too numerous to quote for the most relevance, I'll just throw this in:

I, myself, possess some unpopular ideas. None relevant to ebooks, so I won't bother listing them. However, no matter how badly I would like certain aspects of reality to be different, I live in the current reality, and that is what shapes my actions. Because I'm not running around acting out in civil disobedience, am I dishonest? A hypocrite? I don't believe so. Would sharing those ideas in a forum automatically mean I'm acting on them? No.

There's a difference between sharing an idea and advocating an action. And certainly between sharing an idea and planning a web site that would be illegal from the word go.

If Giggles were arguing that copyright law was in need of reform, and encouraging people to write their congresscritters to say so, that would be a good thing. But he's not. If Giggles were talking about acts of civil disobedience, in which he fully expected to be punished, even go to jail, and accepted that possibility, that'd be courageous. But he's not. He's advocating other people simply breaking the law, pure and simple.

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

Granted, there have been people on this forum that advocate similar ideas to Giggles' that do so to justify their own actions (piracy, infringement), but they are generally pretty obvious. Some flat-out admit it. So far all I've seen from Giggles is ideas, but no evidence of action. I can't assume the latter due to the former.

Again, he claims to be dishonest and untrustworthy (unless you want to play games with what words mean). Either he's telling the truth, and he's dishonest and untrustworth because he says he is, or he's lying, which also makes him dishonest and untrustworthy. There is no analysis that does not arrive at the same conclusion.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Nexutix

OK, the topic of copyright infringement.

That reads like you cribbed it out of some high school social studies text. From 1980 Communist USSR.

Originally Posted by Nexutix

We better stop beating dead horse, literally.

lit·er·al·ly/ˈlitərəlē/

Adverb:

1.In a literal manner or sense; exactly: "the driver took it literally when asked to go straight over the traffic circle".

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Considering Giggleton an "opponent" at all is where most people usually go wrong. I just assume he's chosen to purposely set me up so I can deliver the punchlines.

Zing!

He's clearly a troll, just trying to provoke reactions. Any reactions. Some people are so desperate for any kind of human contact, even being a punching bag is better than the loneliness. I'm increasingly of the opinion that knows full well what he's doing, and is doing it on purpose.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by tompe

Funny, that is how I read all your arguments. You do not seem to understand simple arguments and seem to miss why your own arguments are bad. Well, I will stop reading your arguments since they are so bad.

Though "simple" is a good description of your posts, I have yet to see anything resembling an argument from you or Giggles. All I see from Giggles is trolling, and all I see from you is naive whining about how the world isn't fair and you can't just take stuff you want without paying for it. That's not an argument, that's just acting like a child.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by tompe

Argument from personal lack of knowledge. Or maye argument prom personal incredulity. Just more fallacies from you.

Again, it's very difficult to determine what you're trying to say, because you are incoherent. But you seem to be saying that you've said even more ridiculous stuff, and that I just haven't seen it.

Is that correct? If so, could you point me to it? I can always use a good laught.

I'll bet you're an Ayn Rand fan, too.

[david_e]

Originally Posted by taustin

He's clearly a troll, just trying to provoke reactions. Any reactions. Some people are so desperate for any kind of human contact, even being a punching bag is better than the loneliness. I'm increasingly of the opinion that knows full well what he's doing, and is doing it on purpose.

And yet you can't help yourself from responding??? Out of approximately 55 posts, 14 of them are yours.

All he's done, at least on this thread, is offer up a few ideas. He hasn't included his personal opinion, unless I missed something (certainly possible), yet you've accused him of some very interesting things, even going so far as to call him names.

Instead of attacking someone for actually THINKING, and not just thinking, but THINKING OUT LOUD, why don't you entertain us all some more and attempt to justify your own actions.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by david_e

And yet you can't help yourself from responding??? Out of approximately 55 posts, 14 of them are yours.

I'm actually curious as to how much of his trolling the moderators are going to put up with.

Originally Posted by david_e

All he's done, at least on this thread,

Nice attempt to move the goalposts, but if you believe that I've been talking about this thread, and not his posts overall, then you really need a remedial course in reading comprehension. Seriously. You're not participating in teh same conversation that I am.

Originally Posted by david_e

is offer up a few ideas.

I've only ever - in any post - seen him offer up one idea: that he doesn't want to have to pay for stuff he wants, and can't afford to buy. That's it.

He hasn't included his personal opinion, unless I missed something (certainly possible), yet you've accused him of some very interesting things, even going so far as to call him names.

Originally Posted by david_e

Instead of attacking someone for actually THINKING, and not just thinking, but THINKING OUT LOUD, why don't you entertain us all some more and attempt to justify your own actions.

Why? What could that possibly do for me that I would want to happen? Do you feel that I owe you something? That I have some obligation to act in the way you want? If so, how is it that this is a one way obligation? That I have to act according to your expectations, but you don't have to act according to mine? Because I - in all seriousness - have some suggestions on things you could do that would make me happier.

[Giggleton]

All I have ever said and all I will ever say "here" is that everyone should be free to write what they will, and everyone is also free to read what they will. It honestly doesn't get much simpler than that.

I'm not sure what you mean by trolling. Why would you post anything if you did not want a response?