Between 1900 and 1917, waves of unprecedented terror struck Russia.
Anyone wearing a uniform was a candidate for a bullet to the head or sulfuric acid to the face. Country estates were burnt down (“rural illuminations”) and businesses were extorted or blown up. Bombs were tossed at random into railroad carriages, restaurants, and theaters. Far from regretting the death and maiming of innocent bystanders, terrorists boasted of killing as many as possible, either because the victims were likely bourgeois or because any murder helped bring down the old order. A group of anarcho-communists threw bombs laced with nails into a café bustling with two hundred customers in order “to see how the foul bourgeois will squirm in death agony.”
Instead of the pendulum’s swinging back—a metaphor of inevitability that excuses people from taking a stand—the killing grew and grew, both in numbers and in cruelty. Sadism replaced simple killing. As Geifman explains, “The need to inflict pain was transformed from an abnormal irrational compulsion experienced only by unbalanced personalities into a formally verbalized obligation for all committed revolutionaries.” One group threw “traitors” into vats of boiling water. Others were still more inventive. Women torturers were especially admired.
In 1907, Ivan Pavlov—not the Nobel prize–winning scientist, but one of the brightest theoreticians of the especially violent Maximalists—published The Purification of Mankind, which divided humanity into ethical races. In this analysis, exploiters, vaguely and broadly identified, constituted a race, “morally inferior to our animal predecessors,” which must be exterminated, children and all, by the morally superior race, whose best members were the terrorists themselves. Remarkably enough, this program evoked no indignation, among other Maximalists or even among other socialists, however moderate. Another prominent Maximalist, M. A. Engel’gardt, argued for a red terror that would kill at least twelve million people. As if anticipating the Khmer Rouge, one anarchist group sought to establish equality by killing all educated people.
Not what they want, they want current China with a dash of cultural revolution era but not enough to target them, just the bad people like us. Left wing death squads under their control, social credit scores, struggle sessions and black prisons for anyone to the left of Mao, current American poor status for the normies and Victorian era high class society for them.... Neo Feudalism totalitarian spy state with them at the top.
The jury is basically requiring ISP's to monitor your communications. Sure they do already, but that's beside the point. What if some ISP doesn't want to because privacy is their business model?
It's the same with platforms being required to install licensed-content-fingerprinting bots. What gives anyone else the right to make them do free work? Copyright holders need to police their own content.
"If you're losing so little money on the infraction that you cannot file a proper suit in court, it clearly is not worth 250,000 in damages."
Disregarding that piracy often HELPS intellectual properties nowadays, that reasonable legal standard should still stand. You cannot simultaneously claim that it is costing absurd amounts of money to litigate compared to the miniscule lost profits, and that there is absurd amounts of profits missing from each and every infraction
Add in that Sony does illegal and frivolous SLAPP lawsuits ALL THE TIME (TLOU2 anyone?), and I think the default position of the court should be to award damages for pain and suffering to any company or person Sony ever sues.
They're businesses. But in their case I don't think they're as heavily incentivized to be the bad guys. They just want to nickel and dime you for bullshit, they don't actually get anything out of tracking your shit because they don't have the power to sell your data or target ads at you due to the utility nature of their business.
Even when it comes to punishing you for downloading protected IPs, it's just because they're liable for it. They don't actually gain anything, they're just protecting themselves.
As shitty as ISPs are, record labels and other IP holders are even worse. This is another one of those lawsuits like Apple v. Epic Games, where I wish both parties could lose at the same time.
Sony is just, just the worst. In every shape and form.
Sony will be the major driving force for video-game, movie, anime, and now internet censorship.
Cyberpunk isn’t an ideal future Wokies, no matter how much you pretend it is.
Cyberpunk is the least horrific thing leftists can and did inflict on others.
https://archive.ph/8B9ve https:// www. firstthings. com/article/2020/10/suicide-of-the-liberals
Not what they want, they want current China with a dash of cultural revolution era but not enough to target them, just the bad people like us. Left wing death squads under their control, social credit scores, struggle sessions and black prisons for anyone to the left of Mao, current American poor status for the normies and Victorian era high class society for them.... Neo Feudalism totalitarian spy state with them at the top.
The jury is basically requiring ISP's to monitor your communications. Sure they do already, but that's beside the point. What if some ISP doesn't want to because privacy is their business model?
It's the same with platforms being required to install licensed-content-fingerprinting bots. What gives anyone else the right to make them do free work? Copyright holders need to police their own content.
"If you're losing so little money on the infraction that you cannot file a proper suit in court, it clearly is not worth 250,000 in damages."
Disregarding that piracy often HELPS intellectual properties nowadays, that reasonable legal standard should still stand. You cannot simultaneously claim that it is costing absurd amounts of money to litigate compared to the miniscule lost profits, and that there is absurd amounts of profits missing from each and every infraction
Add in that Sony does illegal and frivolous SLAPP lawsuits ALL THE TIME (TLOU2 anyone?), and I think the default position of the court should be to award damages for pain and suffering to any company or person Sony ever sues.
Are cable companies the good guys? They were on the right side of net nuetrality too.
They're businesses. But in their case I don't think they're as heavily incentivized to be the bad guys. They just want to nickel and dime you for bullshit, they don't actually get anything out of tracking your shit because they don't have the power to sell your data or target ads at you due to the utility nature of their business.
Even when it comes to punishing you for downloading protected IPs, it's just because they're liable for it. They don't actually gain anything, they're just protecting themselves.
I will happily take big corporations trying to squeeze consumers for maximum profit over taking government money for social engineering.
As shitty as ISPs are, record labels and other IP holders are even worse. This is another one of those lawsuits like Apple v. Epic Games, where I wish both parties could lose at the same time.