SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After a few days of the pirate bay being raided, Isohunt has reloaded into a new search engine. Isohunt previously has resurrected isohunt.com. source: http://venturebeat.com/2014/12/12/isohunt-unofficially-resurrects-the-pirate-bay/
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Oldpiratebay.org New Pirate Bay Search Engine
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 28 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Frankfort, Kentucky, makes it against the law to shoot off a policeman's tie.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @07:47AM
Stopping you from delivering a message that the recipient doesn't want to hear is not censorship. Censorship is stopping you from delivering a message that *I* don't want the recipient to hear.
Using the same kind of logic the piracy advocates use, there is no harm done by spam
Using the least-sensible point made by a group of people doesn't prove anything beyond your own intellectual dishonesty. You cannot assume that an opinion supported by a bullshit argument is false purely on that premise (other arguments could be made).
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday December 15 2014, @11:43AM
Stopping you from delivering a message that the recipient doesn't want to hear is not censorship.
Yes, it is, and especially if the government is involved. Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @01:51PM
> Yes, it is, and especially if the government is involved. Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
Which is more important, freedom of expression or property rights?
The deal in the USA is that you can speak all you want as long as you don't use someone's else property to do it without their consent,
Spam is unauthorized use.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:37PM
haha, i think the phrase is "it's as long as you don't take someone else's property without their consent" there bud, which has nothing to do with copying data on computers... We have a great tradition of stealing ideas and our patent system is designed to facilitate idea spreading after the minimal amount of time possible. Just because Disney hacked the system and set their own property rights to last 120 years after the authors death so they could continue extracting money out of mickey mouse for the maximum amount of time, doesn't mean that everyone is going to follow the shitty rule they made up which has a side effect of preventing many other ideas from being exchanged freely after a reasonable amount of time.
Then there's a second copyright argument that involves math. Math is not being copyrightable and everything being digital it is essentially converted to a mathematical representation of the content and being only a representation of the content in mathematical form it is thus not copyrightable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:51PM
> haha, i think the phrase is "it's as long as you don't take someone else's property without their consent" there bud,
No, spam has nothing to do with copyright.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:03AM
Which is more important, freedom of expression or property rights?
Freedom of speech.
Also, that's bullshit. If you don't like spam, you can try to block it. The spammers are (unless we're talking about malware and botnets) using their own property to send the spam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @04:49PM
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to a right to deliver your message in any way you see fit. My rights triumph your rights as soon as your actions begin to affect me.
Government thugs have no place stopping people from sending "spam" messages.
My government has not only the right, but duty to protect my well-being, as this is literally their stated purpose.
(Score: 1) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:06AM
Your right to freedom of speech does not extend to a right to deliver your message in any way you see fit. My rights triumph your rights as soon as your actions begin to affect me.
Your rights are not being violated in any way, shape, or form just because you received a message (or many) that you did not like.
My government has not only the right
Governments don't have "rights"; they have powers. Wallow in your own ignorance.
but duty to protect my well-being
To 'protect' you from others' free speech which you allow to be sent to you? Haha.
(Score: 1) by wantkitteh on Monday December 15 2014, @09:24PM
While I think everyone gets the whole argument about restrained interference with our expression rights to deal with receiving unwanted messages, the words "restrained" and "government" can't sit in the same sentence, ever. Any mechanism put in place for a noble purpose with the possibility of extension for other purposes will always be abused. When the UK government had ISPs implement blocking of child porn, everyone nodded and said how good it was and no-one who shouldn't already have been seeking mental health assistance noticed it. When Big Media pointed out that this existing solution could also be used to prevent copyright infringement at minimal expense, everyone pounded their heads into the desk and started wondering how we fell for the ol' "think of the children" line again and failed to see this coming in the long game.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:10AM
When the UK government had ISPs implement blocking of child porn, everyone nodded and said how good it was and no-one who shouldn't already have been seeking mental health assistance noticed it.
Nonsense. I know they are few and far between, but some people actually have brains and are not completely and utterly ignorant of history. Plenty of perfectly intelligent people realize that censorship will inevitably be abused, based on simple historical evidence.