pragmakist

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

It keeps the butter hard and useless?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Yeah.

And we can still block entire sites on the web.

The sites the friends with adblockers promote.
The friends who don't notice what they promote.
What unholy bastards the people who own the sites they promote are.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You know, that's a good idea anyway.

I wonder though what that would mean for the copyright?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In Denmark the case surrounding "Nøddebo præstegård" caused copyright to be enacted.

I've noticed the theme come up in other countries, amongst these France, but I'll grant that I may have overestimated its importance by overfitting to prior knowledge.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

The purpose of copyright in the USA, and as far as I know in Brittain, yes.

But please remember that in much of the rest of the world copyright is a reaction to people, creators, getting in trouble over third party usage of their creations.

Leading to the idea that a creator should have the power to stop people from using their works for whatever the creator deems objectionable.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Denmark has 880 Pirates of all kinds and they "reach" 46% of 15-24 year olds?

That's some bloody effective Pirates right there!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

You're right!

(Still think they might be doing just that, some of them.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

That thing where they claim the username/password combo is wrong?

That sounds like a really good idea if the site thinks the reason they're a lot of different lock-on attemps from that one ip is because its a hacker with a list of stolen credentials.

Basically just tell them their list is fake and "go away and stop bothering our customers, please."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The usual solution outside the US is to not mention the state at all.

All you need is a right to privacy, not a list of those who are not allowed to peek

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

State law is one thing, but to me it seems obvous that "his or her right to be secure in their papers" has been broken.

Edit: Unfortunately the founders formulated that as a limit on government, again not actually succeding in securing any rights.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Thank you, I was really wondering what "csb" stood for.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah, also please, make some content.

Doesn't matter that it stinks, we wont watch it till you get better anyway.

view more: next ›