Jump to content

Kim Dotcom laying smack down on Obama, Biden, etc


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Really? You can't figure out who holds the monopoly or what creates the monopoly? Am I reading this correctly?

 

I can figure out a monopoly, that's why I'm asking you to define the parties who monopolies and are engaging in monopolistic behavior in the Kim Dot Com case. It's a very simple question that doesn't need to be answered with another question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

If you I can't figure out on your my own why the test analogy is bad, I'm not going to act like it should be obvious and call people stupid heads. waste my time explaining it to you.

 

You also can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that just because a law exists doesn't make it a good, wise, or just law.

 

I fixed the first part for you.

 

Regarding the second, you brought up the courts and their supposed skepticism regarding shrink wrap EULAs. You did it sans substantiation of course. Pardon me for thinking you were talking about legality when you brought up the courts. My bad. :wacko: Anyway, If you're on this "it is ok to take other people's ideas and use them for myself" morality kick, why not make your case in the courts or the legislative process? Do you have an internship next semester so you can start to get a dose of the real world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fixed the first part for you.

 

Regarding the second, you brought up the courts and their supposed skepticism regarding shrink wrap EULAs. You did it sans substantiation of course. Pardon me for thinking you were talking about legality when you brought up the courts. My bad. :wacko: Anyway, If you're on this "it is ok to take other people's ideas and use them for myself" morality kick, why not make your case in the courts or the legislative process? Do you have an internship next semester so you can start to get a dose of the real world?

...

 

I wouldn't teach you how to tie your own shoes, either; and quite frankly, if you can't understand why your own analogy is laughably horrendous, then I'm not going to waste my own very valuable time attempting to explain it to you because a) you're too damn dense to grasp the concepts, and b) my time is far more valuable than yours.

 

Additionally, I see you can't remember your own arguments. You and GG the one who injected the courts into this discussion, and I was simply speaking to your incorrect absolute assertions.

 

I'll try to dumb this down even further for you:

 

Let's suppose that I invented a machine that would allow me to replicate perfectly any and all products on the Earth as often as I liked, and I offered this service to everyone in the world for free. A large % of the world took me up on this offer, and I replicated 10 million dollar homes, Ferraris, and an endless supply of whatever these individuals wanted free of any cost; would this be a good thing or a bad thing? Why?

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

I wouldn't teach you how to tie your own shoes, either; and quite frankly, if you can't understand why your own analogy is laughably horrendous, then I'm not going to waste my own very valuable time attempting to explain it to you because a) you're too damn dense to grasp the concepts, and b) my time is far more valuable than yours.

 

Additionally, I see you can't remember your own arguments. You and GG the one who injected the courts into this discussion, and I was simply speaking to your incorrect absolute assertions.

 

I'll try to dumb this down even further for you:

 

Let's suppose that I invented a machine that would allow me to replicate perfectly any and all products on the Earth as often as I liked, and I offered this service to everyone in the world for free. A large % of the world took me up on this offer, and I replicated 10 million dollar homes, Ferraris, and an endless supply of whatever these individuals wanted free of any cost; would this be a good thing or a bad thing? Why?

 

Answer the question first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

 

 

I'll try to dumb this down even further for you:

 

Let's suppose that I invented a machine that would allow me to replicate perfectly any and all products on the Earth as often as I liked, and I offered this service to everyone in the world for free. A large % of the world took me up on this offer, and I replicated 10 million dollar homes, Ferraris, and an endless supply of whatever these individuals wanted free of any cost; would this be a good thing or a bad thing? Why?

 

In your scenario did you buy the rights to Ferrari's original design or did you steal them?

Edited by 4merper4mer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In your scenario did you buy the rights to Ferrari's original design or did you steal them?

I simply walked up to the Ferrari, and replicated it with my replication machine. This replication produces an unlimited supply of Ferraris.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I simply walked up to the Ferrari, and replicated it with my replication machine. This replication produces an unlimited supply of Ferraris.

 

Magically, women with gigantic breasts also appear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I simply walked up to the Ferrari, and replicated it with my replication machine. This replication produces an unlimited supply of Ferraris.

 

In that case I give the human race about 4 generations before extinction. Good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case I give the human race about 4 generations before extinction. Good job.

That's not even an argument... infact, it's just a lazy, ignorant, and otherwise just plain stupid thing to say.

 

Natural scarcity is a bad thing. However it's an unfortunate reality which nature has bestowed on us. What is absolutely unconscionable is the artificial creation of scarcity for scarcity sake. Technologies which render the scarce abundant should be embraced. If this drives down, or even eliminates some prices, so be it.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not even an argument... infact, it's just a lazy, ignorant, and otherwise just plain stupid thing to say.

 

Natural scarcity is a bad thing. However it's an unfortunate reality which nature has bestowed on us. What is absolutely unconscionable is the artificial creation of scarcity for scarcity sake. Technologies which render the scarce abundant should be embraced. If this drives down, or even eliminates some prices, so be it.

 

Except you're not innovating, you're just copying. Something that your comrades tried to do as well until they ran out of ideas to copy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not even an argument... infact, it's just a lazy, ignorant, and otherwise just plain stupid thing to say.

 

Natural scarcity is a bad thing. However it's an unfortunate reality which nature has bestowed on us. What is absolutely unconscionable is the artificial creation of scarcity for scarcity sake. Technologies which render the scarce abundant should be embraced. If this drives down, or even eliminates some prices, so be it.

 

I think in Econ 201 you may learn about some new concepts. Between now and September I'll oversimplify it a bit by pointing out that your imaginary machine which doesn't exist but makes you feel better about stealing music and porn cannot innovate new ideas. Anyone who does innovate new ideas will instantly have them stolen so why bother? Instead we can all sit around and get fat in our big houses until something comes along for which we are utterly unprepared. Maybe it is a disease or an asteroid or whatever. All the lazy losers that have been bred will be powerless to deal with it. Congrats.

 

And no offense but I hope Ferrari sues the crap out of you when you steal their design.

Edited by 4merper4mer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...