FBI Closes Megaupload and arrests several of their employees

@the second half: Oh come on, I just explained this shit. Are my posts really that hard to read?
“And I’m sorry, but, you’re not going to get statistics on that, which is why instead I’ve lined up the incentives in my posts (which have been repeatedly and horrendously misread/strawmanned) that encourage someone to pirate a game/movie/music and then never buy the product or a related product. I won’t be able to give you the statisics, so you can just base your opinion on what the incentives suggest people are doing, or continue to believe something just because it supports anti-corporation sentiment.”

The statistics aren’t there so instead I rely on an explanation of the incentives and how they encourage people to pirate without buying. And if you do want some sort of statistic make a poll on this forum asking people whether or not they pirate without later purchasing the product or related products.

maybe I’d agree with you that my points were hollow, if any were actually adequately addressed and refuted, yet a good 75% of EVERY SINGLE ONE of my posts is largely ignored. And I’ve been in a nasty interwebz mood recently. I apologize for being an ass, but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong and that doesn’t necessarily mean I’ll stop being an ass.

If you don’t have any factual evidence to support your claims, no one can believe you. Sorry, but that’s how it goes. If your incentives don’t have any factual backup, then are they really going to be taken seriously? Your incentives are, and you know this, merely guesses as to what people who pirate will, or will not do. And what matters more, guesses on how people will react, or actual evidence that shows how people react?
As for the poor analogy, I wasn’t trying to make it a model as to what you said. I was meaning to say “This is like saying only a minority will buy burgers after having them at a friend’s BBQ, then not giving any evidence to support that.”
Sorry for leaving that part out, I didn’t have my coffee yet at the time I wrote it. D:
By the way, no one is misquoting or strawmanning you, we see your argument as it is. If someone is misquoting you, then it would be ALOT more obvious. Don’t make excuses as to why people don’t believe you, I read your posts long before Jethro came in and debunked them, and they were the same to me then as they are now: Bullshit.

I’m not guessing at incentives. An incentive is factual evidence. And people’s reactions to incentives are educated guesses. You can argue that the incentives I have posed are false, or that there are other incentives that I have not considered, but you have yet to do that. I have given you incentives, THOSE ARE FACTUAL EVIDENCE. Refute my evidence, or gtfo, stop plugging your ears and saying it’s not evidence. I challenge you. Take one of my earlier lengthier posts and quote ALL OF IT. Then, in red, type below each of my points your argument that you think refutes my point. And you don’t get to say something vague and unspecific, you have to reply to something EXACTLY explaining the error in my point.

You’re analogy is still shitty as fuck. You use faulty analogies and gross exaggerations (see a couple pages back). You’re not fighting with logic, you’re fighting with bad rhetoric.

The difference between you and me this whole time is I have repeatedly said “When given a free, often superior, usually identical, and only sometimes inferior alternative (those are the factual incentives) to a product that costs money, with the only significant drawback being the moral issue of illegality/piracy, the majority of the people will shit on morals and take the free shit (that is the “guess” on people’s reactions).” All this time you’ve been saying “Herp Derp nothing is certain herp derp the truth cannot be known.” If you seriously don’t think people react to a free immoral alternative by not taking advantage of it, then you sir, are a fucking idiot.

And I have given you statistics. Remember the bagel guy? There was about an 80% payment on the bagels. If 1 in 5 people steals a bagel then you can bet more would pirate a song or a movie or a game. You’re like a god damn agnostic who says “But you don’t know that” every time there’s a 1% level of uncertainty.
And remember when I went on tpb and posted the top two movies and their seeders and leechers? It’s preposterous to claim that people are “demoing” those movies. Pirating a movie to sample it when you could just watch a trailer makes absolutely no sense. I don’t get how you can think things like that happen at all frequently.

How could Jethro debunk my posts if he only addressed less than 50% of what I actually posted? He mis-quoted me by quoting tiny sections of what I had written thus taking it way out of context.

The thing that frustrates me about all this is about 90% of the replies to my posts have completely avoided actually addressing anything I have said. They all just spout something criticizing my lack of evidence that looks pretty nice when you pretend my post was actually the tiny section quoted. I guess that makes Jethro a successful troll and you a successful idiot.

:facepalm:

arguments aren’t resolved by refuting a wall of text paragraph by paragraph, you know

SAYS YOU!!

Quantum mechanics, also known as quantum physics or quantum theory, is a branch of physics providing a mathematical description of much of the dual particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter. It departs from classical mechanics primarily at the atomic and subatomic scales, the so-called quantum realm. In advanced topics of quantum mechanics, some of these behaviors are macroscopic and only emerge at very low or very high energies or temperatures. The name “quantum mechanics”, coined by Max Planck, derives from the observation that some physical quantities can change only by discrete amounts, or quanta. For example, the angular momentum of an electron bound to an atom or molecule is quantized. In the context of quantum mechanics, the wave–particle duality of energy and matter and the uncertainty principle provide a unified view of the behavior of photons, electrons and other atomic-scale objects.

The mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics are abstract. A mathematical function called the wavefunction provides information about the probability amplitude of position, momentum, and other physical properties of a particle. Mathematical manipulations of the wavefunction usually involve the bra-ket notation, which requires an understanding of complex numbers and linear functionals. The wavefunction treats the object as a quantum harmonic oscillator and the mathematics is akin to that of acoustic resonance. Many of the results of quantum mechanics are not easily visualized in terms of classical mechanics; for instance, the ground state in the quantum mechanical model is a non-zero energy state that is the lowest permitted energy state of a system, rather than a more traditional system that is thought of as simply being at rest with zero kinetic energy.

The earliest versions of quantum mechanics were formulated in the first decade of the 20th century. At around the same time, the atomic theory and the corpuscular theory of light (as updated by Einstein) first came to be widely accepted as scientific fact; these latter theories can be viewed as quantum theories of matter and electromagnetic radiation. The early quantum theory was significantly reformulated in the mid-1920s by Werner Heisenberg, Max Born, Wolfgang Pauli and their associates, and the Copenhagen interpretation of Niels Bohr became widely accepted. By 1930, quantum mechanics had been further unified and formalized by the work of Paul Dirac and John von Neumann, with a greater emphasis placed on measurement in quantum mechanics, the statistical nature of our knowledge of reality and philosophical speculation about the role of the observer. Quantum mechanics has since branched out into almost every aspect of 20th century physics and other disciplines such as quantum chemistry, quantum electronics, quantum optics and quantum information science. Much 19th century physics has been re-evaluated as the classical limit of quantum mechanics, and its more advanced developments in terms of quantum field theory, string theory, and speculative quantum gravity theories.

I think I proved my point…

you certainly did!

This one would be. The answer is none of you will refute me because none of you can refute me. You just throw out rhetoric attacking me rather than logically addressing any part of the subject.

No, you haven’t, because that wasn’t what was being discussed in the first place. The discussion was centered on the pros and cons of piracy. Let me quote you: “piracy hurts the hell out of anybody or anything pirated from” (which by the way, is not true).

[COLOR=‘Cyan’]Just so you know, i read everything you typed. I like typing in cyan, and I dont like typing large walls of text as replys, my reply? Your logic is shit. nuff said :expressionless:

Also

[COLOR=‘Cyan’]what :what::S

EDIT: Also, just realized, garth, your kind of a joke. you expect everyone to type large walls of text with a million good points and no hollow spots in replys. I think everyone is kinda tired of typing all of that, so think for once why everyone isent liking you that much.

https://news.yahoo.com/megaupload-data-could-erased-week-061419020.html

I thought this thread was to post relevant info about what’s going on with MU, not for pointless debate about who is more ethically correct in their opinion about piracy.

because most of the threads on these forums tend to stay on topic

Well as an attempt to say on topic does anyone else know of other sites being taken down? Or maybe different sites being more proactive in thier services and such. 2012 seems to be the year of the Internet police so far.

we should all just sing; we shall overcome.

Pretty much this.

Dude… you just… I just… I can’t… my…

Garth, nothing you’re saying makes any sense. What exactly are you arguing at this stage? that book readers are more scrupulous than gamers/audiophiles/moviegoers? You’ve brought nothing to bear but your own “personal prejudices,” and I could swear that I just saw you claim - in spite of the direct contradiction it would imply - that they are factual. I don’t even?

“I’m not guessing at incentives. An incentive is factual evidence. And people’s reactions to incentives are educated guesses. You can argue that the incentives I have posed are false, or that there are other incentives that I have not considered, but you have yet to do that.”

Factual evidence? Where is it then? Where do you get these “factual” incentives? Yourself? That isn’t a reliable enough source. Where’s that “statistic” you gave me? The bagel guy? Bagels and pirating are different. Since you don’t give any backing up on these, I laugh at this. Seeing how I DO ask for factual evidence and I HAVE, maybe not refuted, but just expressed my reasons for not going with your argument a few posts back, and seeing your silly ass take back what you said when it’s turned against you, then act like all “Well, actually, you’re misquoting me, uh uh uh, yeah, Jethro did it! It’s all his fault!” is really funny.

By the way, my “analogy” may have been poor, but, like I said, it wasn’t supposed to stand for a model as to what you said, I didn’t include the “then not giving any evidence for it” part (My fault :[).
And my exaggeration was a pretty good sum up of what you said, I mean, you were basically claiming Group A (games, movies, mp3) = Not Loyal = Bad, and Group B (books) = Loyal = Good.
But I guess that doesn’t count, since you took that claim back.

‘How could Jethro debunk my posts if he only addressed less than 50% of what I actually posted? He mis-quoted me by quoting tiny sections of what I had written thus taking it way out of context.’

‘The thing that frustrates me about all this is about 90% of the replies to my posts have completely avoided actually addressing anything I have said. They all just spout something criticizing my lack of evidence that looks pretty nice when you pretend my post was actually the tiny section quoted.’

Your denial is hilarious.

‘I guess that makes Jethro a successful troll and you a successful idiot.’

Really? Lol, the only idiot is you, asshole. I can explain why you’re an idiot, but the proof is in the pudding, and the pudding stinks(Sorry for bad pun)!
I criticize your lack of evidence because, hey, I’m skeptical. I mean, I never believed in ghosts existed until a few odd things happened to me, then did I start to say ‘hmm, this needs re-thinking’, and, to this day, I don’t believe in God since, well guess what, lack of evidence.

This isn’t a battle you’re going to win, kid. Think about it, not one single person on this thread even remotely agrees with you. All you’ll do is get even more negativity directed at you. Look, here’s a hint, get out of this mean, nasty forum, and go outside and play! You’ll have so much fun.

Look, there’s some kids out there now! Join them, Garth, you won’t regret it.

Took you this long to see what I’ve been saying a long time ago. Garth is a persistent and ignorant little idiot kid that is best to ignore. Not even after a months long ban he managed to take the hint and not come back here.

I was being patient. REALLY PATIENT!

Christ, this Garth guy’s a baby. A little baby who denies and pouts when he’s wrong.

Sometimes being patient is just delaying the inevitable. I’ve learned that you can’t argue with persistent idiots on either the internet or in real life. But at least you can punch people in real life.

Here’s what Garth’s response will probably be: Oh no, geekofalltrades, that was Jethrosoup! It was his fault, he misquoted me! Honest!

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.