TheCoreWithin

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... hind-bars/

Really depressing...

I know..
I don't like Britain at all anymore.
First the crap with Julian Assange, now this.. and countless other crimes against humanity that are sometimes worse than what the US does to its people.
He gets the same punishment as some people who have actually committed murders.

Something else that I find rather horrible which I read today: A guy paralyzed from the neck down from an accident who can only blink his eyes to communicate wants to receive euthanasia, since every second of his life is a living hell and a prison. According to British law it's illegal to commit suicide, so no judge allows him to take his life. So cruel!
Screw that BLEEP, interfering in people's lives so much is not something that we should accept in 2012!

Sometimes it really winds me up what's happening in Holland, but Britain has it bad. Real bad.
Here we have political parties wanting to close down coffee shops, TPB blockades from anti piracy companies who get everything they want, and more things are forbidden by law than you can ever imagine. But that's about it, it's not that bad compared to the rest of the world.

Yeah sounds dodgy all right but to be fair the guy running the site knew the risks when he started it. He exploited loop holes and legal grey areas to avoid being done and benefited from the financial gain tied to that risk. Risk/reward.

Euthanasia is a completely different area and ridiculous off topic. Suicide has not been illegal in the UK since 1961.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Act_1961

I'm pretty sure there is more to it that just wanting to let a man suffer. The reason he was denied it was because he couldn't do it himself. Therefore it would technically be seen as murder. For the courts to rule on something like this the law would have to be changed to allow it and that's not something the court can do only Parliament.

The law covering assisted suicide is currently under review.

Sorry, I meant euthanasia, and not suicide of course. For me it's kinda the same. Another way of saying euthanasia in Holland is "help with suicide".
It's off topic, yes, but the news was also from Britain. To me these cases can both be placed in the Human Rights category where Britain seems to be making lots of mistakes in lately.

There are some things that I can't understand about government interference.
-Why can't a person decide for himself whether to use soft drugs or not? Alcohol is legal, why isn't weed? Alcohol is worse in every way and even considered a hard drug.
-Why can't a person decide for himself whether he lives or dies? Who are you, as a government, to decide that for someone?
-Why is the punishment for someone who's only crime is facilitating in sharing information (technically nothing more than zeros and ones) often worse than rapists, violent people, murderers or many other forms of asshole-ism?

I do agree that the guy knew his risks. It's the same with the piratebay guys, but I disagree with how this is seen as the biggest crime you could commit, while no one is being physically hurt. These websites are a logical effect from the existence of free information in the Internet and big companies are too slow and old fashioned to answer the demand for it.
Internet is new and scary for people who have old business models and old brains. Instead of suing everyone, change your tactics.
Like this: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/music_industry

Do local minimarts sue big supermarkets because they take away their business model? Do fast food chains get sued by snack bars because they take away their customers? No. It's how the market works. The fact that some ancient copyright law protects content from being copied shouldn't mean that law is still valid when the whole new technological world of content distribution appeared.

As long as the business model doesn't change and there are no legal alternative that offer the exact same ease of use and amount of content, these guys operating those sites do nothing wrong in my eyes. They are just offering what the Internet users demand.
If it's "sooo criminal" to illegally download, why do so many people do it? Is everyone a criminal then?
I wouldn't hurt a fly and I've never hit anyone in the face or even steal 1 piece of candy. Yet I'd be a criminal because I can't find a legal alternative for a TV show I want to watch. This: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones (sorry, Oatmeal overdose, but he seems to understand it better than anyone).

What's even worse is that the people actually generating the illegal content always get away with it, while site operators (nothing more than facilitators in 'online distribution of information') are being seen as the ones who did it.
They're not doing anything. They just have a site. They don't add the content, they don't upload. The users that do upload are the only criminals in the matter. Go to the source of the problem!
You don't sue a car company because they make cars that can go 200kph, right? You sue the guy that drives 200kph in it! (and those usually don't even have to go to jail)

I have a big problem with how freedom is taken away from people in a world that is supposed to become more free.
And as a person who is well aware of the concept of logic, the whole world doesn't add up..

Tiel wrote: -Why can't a person decide for himself whether he lives or dies? Who are you, as a government, to decide that for someone?

I agree that someone who is terminally ill should have the choice to live or die, but in the case you quoted the person themselves couldn't physically take their own life even with help. Therefore someone would have to do it. There have been cases where the assist has been to mix drugs for the person who wants to die but in this case, someone would have to physically end his life. That's where it falls under the realm of murder.

Either that or let him starve to death and that would be something different altogether.

I guess it would just conflict with too many other laws at present and would have a greater negative effect on other cases until that law is reviewed to allow exceptions but that is going to take a while I guess.

I also agree with the whole piracy thing, there is something fundamentally wrong when a guy who hosts a website of links to random tv shows gets 4 years in prison when a drunk can mow down and kill 2 children in their car and get 4 suspended sentence and their driving license revoked for a year, but the 'money' that put him away doesn't care about BLEEP like that doesn't effect them or their greedy intentions directly. Its sad. Really sad.

The worlds BLEEP and always will be while the people with money call the shots.

There's something fundamentally wrong with the whole 'law' system since there are never exceptions to the rule. Just like bureaucracy.
To me it's not murder if someone asks for it. Especially when the police is informed beforehand and present when it happens.
Either way, I'd be more than willing to pull the plug on someone like that asking for it. If that makes me a murderer by law, sure. But I know I wouldn't be, morally.

Law, morals and logic never really go hand in hand. They should.

It's something that happens in the UK where private industry can fund specific units within law enforcement to take on a specific role.

United Kingdom law differs. There, private parties can initiate criminal prosecutions if they're willing to cover the costs out of their own pockets.

This is the biggest joke in the whole story. If you have money, you can buy police and prosecution.

People flexing their money and bending the law, then they wonder why people download their stuff?

Ive been trying to keep on top of the Megauploads case but that seems to have been kept out of the main stream media.

Untill they make content cheap enough to stream/download then this wont go away.

But Cook worries that the "enormous financial resources and clout" of organizations like FACT, and the lack of public oversight of their activities, could deprive defendants of a fair trial.

I guess that says it all, money and power vs normal man = lose

MindyMcfly wrote: Ive been trying to keep on top of the Megauploads case but that seems to have been kept out of the main stream media.

Mainstream maybe, but it's all over Ars Technica

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-asked- ... le-sharers

This is all kinds of crazy.

interesting interview :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... F48PjCtW4k