| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: the only bad thing.... If the choice is moral relativism vs fundy christianity, I choose relativism. If the choice is between moral relativism and muslim fundamentalism, again, I choose relativism. In my mind, there's no difference between a suicide bomber and a right wing abortion clinic bomber. Both groups are filled with morons who espouse only THEIR world view.
But, to the subject at hand. If society tolerates it (and we DO tolerate P2P traffic), then it's MORALLY acceptable. What gives YOU the right to judge anyone? It's a moronic christian belief system that's led to the death of more people throughout history than ANY other belief system.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. |
|
 MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | You are kind of on the right path. You see the Nazi Conservatives want you to eat babies, but only after they are born. After the sacrifice Martians will build giant pyramids to direct the inner-energy of the earth for a mass New World Order facilitating a new found era of misogyny and complete slavery of the non reptilian half-breed race.
Finally the pretend bird flu scare will finally be realized for what it is; a tool to legitimize inserting GPS chips into everyone that will record all of our movements, conversations, and thoughts. The Dems are in it with the Aliens. They're building landing strips for gay Martians.
Obviously, we must legalize P2P if we want to stop this. It's clear and you BBR idiots can't seem to grasp it. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Shaw
| reply to Cod
said by Cod:said by karlmarx:But, you've made an interesting point. If 99% of 55% of the internet bandwidth (i.e. 54%) is 'illegal', then isn't the law wrong? I mean, if we say over 50% of the traffic on the internet is 'illegal', then, by definition, it's NOT immoral. "Group morality develops from shared concepts and beliefs and is often codified to regulate behavior within a culture or community. Various defined actions come to be called moral or immoral." I would argue, if the majority of the population engages in said beliefs, then no matter what the law says, our moral compass has decided that what we are doing is NOT immoral. There are many laws that tried to codify morality, but that does not mean they are good laws (prohibition comes to mind). So, to summarize. If everyone is doing it, then it's the socially accepted standard for society, thus, cannot be considered immoral, notwithstanding what the 'law' says. Back in the 1940's & 1950's, I would suggest that over 50% of the German population didn't think that concentration camps, exterminating the jewish population & the "final solution" was wrong. By your line of reasoning, are you suggesting that it wasn't immoral? The truth is the average joe public in Germany had barely an inkling of the scope of what was going on during the War!!! Most soldiers on any side of the war, have an immense amount of trouble reconciling the events.....this tragedy happened and for most people was incomprehensible. I resent you comparing your issue to Germany's genocide, it doesn't even compare on moral, psychological damage, or the immense physical harm that WWII cause for everyone on both sides. |
|
Reviews:
·Shaw
| reply to odog
said by odog:You know it! But ya know... I'm probably wrong  It's probably closer to 99.9%  Regardless of the exact number it is the lions share of overall BT traffic illegal. Unfortunately it is also a nearly impossible statistic to reliably gather. I suppose the few million linux users out there downloading their linux distros using torrents is the .1%???? Or the 8 million World of Warcraft players downloading their patches is .1%??? |
|
|
|
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx:But, to the subject at hand. If society tolerates it (and we DO tolerate P2P traffic), then it's MORALLY acceptable. What gives YOU the right to judge anyone? It's a moronic christian belief system that's led to the death of more people throughout history than ANY other belief system. People tolerated drunk driving until too many people were getting killed. Same goes for speeding. It's o.k. until someone going too fast and causes a fatal accident. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to Maxo
What about the megacorps? Aren't they involved in this too?
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | said by pnh102:What about the megacorps? Aren't they involved in this too? You have no idea. |
|
 FiLPremium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | reply to pkarlos_76
Exactly...
Anyone can pull stat's out their ass and claim "its nearly impossible to statistically gather".
The hell? LOL. Why even put up stats then? Just say "Its my opinion" instead of sticking to your guns and make-believe numbers...
Plus, I see many hypocrites bashing a service we know they use! |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx:But, you've made an interesting point. If 99% of 55% of the internet bandwidth (i.e. 54%) is 'illegal', then isn't the law wrong? I mean, if we say over 50% of the traffic on the internet is 'illegal', then, by definition, it's NOT immoral. "Group morality develops from shared concepts and beliefs and is often codified to regulate behavior within a culture or community. Various defined actions come to be called moral or immoral." I would argue, if the majority of the population engages in said beliefs, then no matter what the law says, our moral compass has decided that what we are doing is NOT immoral. There are many laws that tried to codify morality, but that does not mean they are good laws (prohibition comes to mind). So, to summarize. If everyone is doing it, then it's the socially accepted standard for society, thus, cannot be considered immoral, notwithstanding what the 'law' says. I think its time for the RIAA and MPAA to make a license to be on the internet and make the internet illegal in general, since it is "mostly" used for piracy. |
|
bohn
join:2006-05-30
Scarborough, ON | reply to odog
P2P is big business. Even the catch-phrase of the second millenium. Many are stealing ideas from the P2Pers. Also known as taking pointers from the P2Pers. This piracy malarky is the jealous people with dial-up or the unfortunate few who live in the wrong country like Canada and are capped to the hilt. I'm just waiting for this thing to go full swing man everybody getting some modern day connections all this HD dvd jargon. The wondrous age of bits and bytes and the downtrodden who cry when they should be slapped silly as they do nothing more than sit on their fat ass and complain. If you can't beat them join them. Plonk. |
|
bohn
join:2006-05-30
Scarborough, ON | reply to Cod
All they had to do was shift the balance of wealth. The race itself is harmless as could be seem during the war when they wouldn't even fight for their own country. |
|
| reply to karlmarx
Karl;
Clearly you are a religious man. Your moral relativism actually has roots in a modern religion.
The long and short of your definition is, "The whole of the law shall be do what thou wilt?"
»www.dowhatthouwilt.com/ |
|
| reply to odog
said by odog:Until BT can shed the stigma of being P2P... it is pretty hard to get it mainstream. BT may be 55% of the internet's bandwidth, but 99% of that bandwidth is illegal  I don't think the dvd images of Fedora Core I downloaded via Bittorrent are illegal in any way. 99% is a little over the top IMO. |
|
