News:

Local man invests life savings into turnips. When asked whether it was a wise decision he responded, "Eh. I'm sure someone will buy them."

Main Menu

Politics

Started by spitllama, September 05, 2012, 07:15:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

braix

Quote from: Pianist Da Sootopolis on July 18, 2018, 10:51:06 PMawh did I miss the biannual nsm politics shitposting?
Don't worry, you aren't missing out; NSM is just one huge shitpost
Quote from: MaestroUGC on August 19, 2015, 12:22:27 PM
Braixen is a wonderful [insert gender] with beautiful [corresponding gender trait] and is just the darlingest at [stereotypical activity typically associated with said gender] you ever saw.

Tobbeh99

K so apparently we finally got a new governement. And Stefan Löfvén stays as prime minister. So the socialist party stays in government with some other center-political parties: The Enviroment Party, The Liberals and The Center-party. I mean it's ok, since the're aren't really any good parties who can form a government, neither the right nor the left has a majority, since the nationalist party has so much percentages. So y... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ at least we got a government. Funnily enough, the budget was voted for before the prime minister voting, and the right wing parties budget got through. Which means that we have a center-left government which is ruling with a right wing budget. ...y. ..... lol. But y, feels good that we got a government at least, and that the politics is working. Better than nothing I guess.
Quote from: Dudeman on August 16, 2016, 06:11:42 AM
tfw you get schooled in English grammar by a guy whose first language is not English

10/10 tobbeh

mikey

I will be upset if any of my taxes go to a wall
unmotivated

Sebastian

Whew...I don't usually get too involved in political things, but apparently NY passed a bill today saying that someone can abort up until the day of birth. My gf lives in NY, so she was the one that shared this info with me. I was kind of shocked at that.



PlayfulPiano

#2269
Quote from: Sebastian on January 22, 2019, 07:36:58 PMWhew...I don't usually get too involved in political things, but apparently NY passed a bill today saying that someone can abort up until the day of birth. My gf lives in NY, so she was the one that shared this info with me. I was kind of shocked at that.

That I haven't heard before, and I live in NY. I'm pro-choice but I still think that abortions should be allowed up to a certain point in the baby's development (iirc up to the third trimester is the limit most people agree with).

I mean, making sure abortions are legal should be a thing, just due to right of autonomy, but there is a generally moral line involved.


Edit: Did some more research. Abortions past 24 weeks only can happen if it's in the threat of the mother or if the fetus is nonviable.

"In the face of calls at the federal level to weaken abortion rights, the bill maintains abortions as legal within 24 weeks of the start of a pregnancy – "or at any time when necessary to protect a woman's life or health.'' Late-term abortions had previously been authorized under state law if they meant saving the life of a woman."

https://buffalonews.com/2019/01/22/long-stalled-abortion-bill-passes-new-york-legislature/

Yeah, that's completely fine.

Sebastian

#2270
Ah, ok. That clears that up. Yeah, what I heard was more off the cuff and not grounded in any source lol.



EDIT:
This is what I read:
(Green = new; Red = what's being taken out)
Spoiler
[close]



Tobbeh99

So apparently the EU is in process of making a new copyright directive. Which has been really controversial. There are 2 articles that have been harshly criticized, article 11 (called "link tax"(by people)) and article 13 (called "censorship filters").

Article 11 is the less harmful. It says that internet platforms must pay a tax to link to news material. Which is just strange and dumb, since the links take you to the news sites which makes them bigger and maybe even make them earn more money so.... pretty bad idea. But from what I've heard it's mainly various news publishing firms that angry at google and other internet companies for making a lot of money on ads, which they thought they should earn instead. They're angry that they haven't earned as much money as google on ads, because ads have been a big source of income for news publishers. So they try to enforce a law to make them get more money. Aka. some link tax. Or maybe the internet platforms need to pay for a license, idk. The point is that facebook and other platforms need to pay somehow or buy a license to link to news sites. ... y just as dumb as it sounds... ...

Article 13 is worse I think (although maybe more understandable). It says that big internet sites (like youtube etc.) need to implement a filter that filters out copyrighted material. And everyone understands the reasoning behind this one. It's one of the side effects of internet, that you can share everything online very easily, and also copyrighted material. And people who own copyrighted material think that it's right and just that the same copyright laws apply to internet as to the regular world. And also that they're work have been use freely and that youtube is irresponsible and also making money out of their work. And well... sure I get the idea with the filter. the problem is just that... it's so naive and so unrealistic. It's like those copyright holders think that they can control their work the same way that they can control material things like their car. And that's just not the case. I'm also against the idea of that this filter proactively filters out content, without even knowing if the content owner wants it or not. I think a better idea would be that the copyright owner themselves contacted the platform they have an issue with and ask them to remove their content from it. Rather than the sites doing it proactively (with a filter). because there might be a lot of copyright owners who don't even care about if they're content is up on youtube or whatever. Like I didn't hear so much complain back in the days when youtube was still big (although less commercial as it is now). And the internet has existed for a while, and there must been a lot of sites who had copyrighted material on them. And if that was such a big deal, you'd imagine that the content owners would have taken steps against it back then. And I'm thinking for this myself. Let's say some random site would put up my arrangements (which I technically don't fully own, I only own my derivative version of the original work as long as it doesn't conflict with the copyright of the original work (that's what the Swedish law says about that)), and I didn't like that. I feel like it's more reasonable that I contact the site in question and ask them to take down the arrangements rather than me pushing for a law that would make it so that all sites have to implement a filter to, so that my arrangements never gets uploaded without my permission. And I can understand that if you're a big artist, a lot of sites all over the place might upload your content without your permission, and going after all might be a lot of work. But still, having a filter is like having a guard in each bar checking if you have the right to perform cover songs from the artist, it's just so much control and very little gain, and serving very few people while applying so much control to the rest of society. I simply think it's not worth it. Before I felt like people were just angry about piracy that people could download cd's for free. Now the people advocating for copyright protection and so on just seem crazy about the internet like they're seeing a demon in each corner. While seeming to not understand the fact that it's hard to control ideas since the're not physical, but ideas. And not starting from that viewpoint, but instead seem to insist that ideas are just as much of a property as physical ones like cars and land and houses, and should have the same protection. Which I think is just, out of this world, and is just the not case. So I mean, I value art and creativity and agrees that the idea of copyright can have some merit in protecting cultural works. But even I think that those copyright advocates just seem to crazed and not in touch with the real world, and also pretty old fashioned, not understanding internet pretty much at all.

So I hope these laws don't get in place and that we have more realistic copyright laws, rather than strange ones thinking that ideas and physical objects are the same sort of property.
Quote from: Dudeman on August 16, 2016, 06:11:42 AM
tfw you get schooled in English grammar by a guy whose first language is not English

10/10 tobbeh

WaluigiTime64

#2272
You cannot view this attachment.
My Arrangements (All Outdated)
My Compositions (All Outdated)
Quote from: WaluigiTime64I strive for second place and I will fight for the position.

Splatoon Inkling

Copyright laws are starting to get rediculous, and confusing recently.

Tobbeh99

(I know my post can be long. But you don't have to read them if you're not interested in what I have to say.)

Quote from: Splatoon Inkling on March 10, 2019, 06:44:19 AMCopyright laws are starting to get rediculous, and confusing recently.

I agree, what I thought more as a formality just seem more to be some way to having a grip of the entire internet (I'm imagine some villainous guy having a grip of the entire earth or the internet, lol). Which I definitely don't think was or is the purpose of copyright laws. Also hate that the discussion regarding copyright often is overrun with interest groups here and there rather than sound and reasonable discussion. People tend to lobby a lot for various interests, and sometimes divide it into a political stance, rather than having a reasonable discussion of what a good copyright framework could look like. Which I think is the better way to go about it. Personally I'd like to have copyright protection. But I'd like to have a more nuanced one than now. Probably with shorter protection length, and more protection to the original work than derivative works. And no filters, and various reasonable fair use exceptions. I think it's better, and still just. But I've thought about this a lot, and having a hard time coming up with some sort of "golden solution" to this issue, that would satisfy everyone in all scenarios. The question is harder than I thought.
Quote from: Dudeman on August 16, 2016, 06:11:42 AM
tfw you get schooled in English grammar by a guy whose first language is not English

10/10 tobbeh

AmpharosAndy

innit

Splatoon Inkling

I kind of understand those laws, but how do copyright laws over in the European Union effect us?

mikey

Quote from: Splatoon Inkling on March 10, 2019, 01:40:44 PMI kind of understand those laws, but how do copyright laws over in the European Union effect us?
less european content for us to love hate
unmotivated

Bobbythekid21

Spoiler
You cannot view this attachment.
[close]
333,331 is a prime number.
Spoiler
Quote from: Bobbythekid21 on February 24, 2019, 01:03:24 PM
Well, I'll just stick around for now and be helpful.
I'm gonna hold myself to it by constantly reminding myself of it.
[close]

Tobbeh99

I mean you live in the US, so doesn't matter that much for you guys. But still it might effect you as the US and EU have sort of close relations. But, it can be harder for american companies to do business in EU, because of the regulations and strict policies these articles purposes. Some US news publishers has just stopped posting news in the EU, because of the regulations (until they find a solution for that). So y, doesn't affect the US that much. Maybe more so the internet in general. But I still think it's a bit relevant (obviously for me who lives in the EU (in Sweden)).
Quote from: Dudeman on August 16, 2016, 06:11:42 AM
tfw you get schooled in English grammar by a guy whose first language is not English

10/10 tobbeh