8 ms·

Well, Americans have been saying that about drug war, civil forfeiture, surveillance and many others things for a long long time.

by tn13 10y ago

cdumler 10y ago
Except that civil forfeiture is extremely profitable enterprise [1]. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...
- mthoms 10y ago
  So is the drug war. It all depends on where you're standing.
  - dmix 10y ago
    Prisons, lawyers, judges, social workers running drug rehab programs, feds (DEA, FBI), local police, defense industry selling helicopters, airplanes, surveillance technology, etc, etc. An unthinkable amount of money has been spent and made from the drug war for highly questionable ROI to the public. What type of reduction in police work would take place if the drug war was ended today? 20%? 30%? The war on drugs is a job machine. DEA agents fly around like international playboys from the books I've read. Plus international governments get tons of money from the US to run their own interdiction programs. There has to be some level of influence to keep the 'war' going from these perverse incentives.
    - antisthenes 10y ago
      > highly questionable ROI to the public Only if you exclude people working for the public sector from you know, the public. Those things create jobs for voting constituents. That's the main ROI here. Reduction in crime, drug use and increased security are just beneficial, but not necessary side effects of these initiatives.
      - dmix 10y ago
        Creating jobs for creating jobs sake is such a terrible justification. Especially because in this scenario (like many others) it's not a controlled economic stimulus but an ongoing money drain. Milton Friedman is turning in his grave seeing this idea become mainstream. These are highly skilled people too: lawyers, judges, and highly technical law enforcement who could be working on dealing with real crimes or protecting honest hardworking citizens. Not futile show trials to appease the copyright industry.
- redblacktree 10y ago
  For some. Where's my cut?
  - awqrre 10y ago
    Can't civilians exercise their right to seize anyone's cash?
    - phire 10y ago
      Sure, Just like "Citizen's arrest" is a thing, I'm positive "Citizen's civil forfeiture" is too.
      - simplemath 10y ago
        Ask the Bundy Clan about that
- tn13 10y ago
  Government in general a profitable venture for those in government. You have to produce nothing, please no one and you get to decide how much money is your fair share of what others have worked hard to earn.
  - analognoise 10y ago
    So did you make the roads you drove on to work? Impressive. How about the fire, police, schools, environmental protections, consumer protections, and court system? How big is the military defending your patch of land? I admit there are problems, but I'm always amazed when people say the government doesn't do anything, then take a car to work on public roads, listen to the radio (FCC), eat food (FDA), etc.
    - joering2 10y ago
      but whats your point?? he did make those roads... he paid taxes in gas, insurance, purchase of a car tax, license plate tax... all that do indeed sponsor roads he drives on! as of military defending his patch of land, hard to argue. Africa is much bigger than USA -- how much they spent as a continent on defense? Bet 1000th of what US does. Other than that, he might choose to protect his own land with the second Amendment and keep military out of it, no?
      - CaptSpify 10y ago
        Sure he sponsored the roads, but the government implemented those roads. Planning, buying, organizing, maintaining, etc are all part of the work that the government does.
        joering2 10y ago
        I still don't get it. Who do you think paid for planning, buying, organizing and the cost of maintaining of all that??
        10y ago
joering2 10y ago
... and its important to say, as experience shows, at this point its sadly irrelevant what average americans say. while OP is right -- this doesn't seem to serve majority, the truth is that the system is rigged and this supposed to serve a few multinational corporations that feel their profits are severely cut due to copyright infringement, meanwhile posting record earnings. it is still mind-boggling to me that this non-US human being doing allegedly non-violent crime will probably end up serving 25 years in american prison (wire fraud is a magic word in LE indictments) for a bunch of bits being configured the way to organize in magnet links that sharing of - as far as I know, similarly to URLs, had been found in courts around the world as a non-infringing act.
- 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
  > the truth is that the system is rigged and this supposed to serve a few > multinational corporations that feel their profits are severely cut due > to copyright infringement, meanwhile posting record earnings. Ignore that the system is rigged for the moment. I think it is safe to say these companies really like making more money. I have always wondered why then, they spend so much effort enforcing copyright laws rather than trying alternative methods to solve the problem and make more money. E.g I know a lot of people who have some unblocking service and Netflix. Now they could increase prices for Netflix, so we wouldn't need the unblocking, but that's not on the cards. They would rather spend their efforts blocking me. Is this purely to satisfy contractual obligations? I'd assume that any existing contracts must be in place for such a long time that making changes can't be done for quite a few years into the future and there is no realistic way to amend existing contracts. The contracts would have to cover new productions too. Otherwise, this whole thing makes no sense to me. They appear to be giving up revenue, for no benefit to themselves.
  - chongli 10y ago
    Contracts with regional exclusivity give the content producers something a subscription model never will: a lump sum of risk free, up-front cash. People calling for global Netflix kumba ya with all content available are simply asking for producers to take a haircut.

Well, Americans have been saying that about drug war, civil forfeiture, surveillance and many others things for a long long time.

by tn13 10y ago

Well, Americans have been saying that about drug war, civil forfeiture, surveillance and many others things for a long long time.

cdumler 10y ago

Except that civil forfeiture is extremely profitable enterprise [1]. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...

mthoms 10y ago
So is the drug war. It all depends on where you're standing.
- dmix 10y ago
  Prisons, lawyers, judges, social workers running drug rehab programs, feds (DEA, FBI), local police, defense industry selling helicopters, airplanes, surveillance technology, etc, etc. An unthinkable amount of money has been spent and made from the drug war for highly questionable ROI to the public. What type of reduction in police work would take place if the drug war was ended today? 20%? 30%? The war on drugs is a job machine. DEA agents fly around like international playboys from the books I've read. Plus international governments get tons of money from the US to run their own interdiction programs. There has to be some level of influence to keep the 'war' going from these perverse incentives.
  - antisthenes 10y ago
    > highly questionable ROI to the public Only if you exclude people working for the public sector from you know, the public. Those things create jobs for voting constituents. That's the main ROI here. Reduction in crime, drug use and increased security are just beneficial, but not necessary side effects of these initiatives.
    - dmix 10y ago
      Creating jobs for creating jobs sake is such a terrible justification. Especially because in this scenario (like many others) it's not a controlled economic stimulus but an ongoing money drain. Milton Friedman is turning in his grave seeing this idea become mainstream. These are highly skilled people too: lawyers, judges, and highly technical law enforcement who could be working on dealing with real crimes or protecting honest hardworking citizens. Not futile show trials to appease the copyright industry.
redblacktree 10y ago
For some. Where's my cut?
- awqrre 10y ago
  Can't civilians exercise their right to seize anyone's cash?
  - phire 10y ago
    Sure, Just like "Citizen's arrest" is a thing, I'm positive "Citizen's civil forfeiture" is too.
    - simplemath 10y ago
      Ask the Bundy Clan about that
tn13 10y ago
Government in general a profitable venture for those in government. You have to produce nothing, please no one and you get to decide how much money is your fair share of what others have worked hard to earn.
- analognoise 10y ago
  So did you make the roads you drove on to work? Impressive. How about the fire, police, schools, environmental protections, consumer protections, and court system? How big is the military defending your patch of land? I admit there are problems, but I'm always amazed when people say the government doesn't do anything, then take a car to work on public roads, listen to the radio (FCC), eat food (FDA), etc.
  - joering2 10y ago
    but whats your point?? he did make those roads... he paid taxes in gas, insurance, purchase of a car tax, license plate tax... all that do indeed sponsor roads he drives on! as of military defending his patch of land, hard to argue. Africa is much bigger than USA -- how much they spent as a continent on defense? Bet 1000th of what US does. Other than that, he might choose to protect his own land with the second Amendment and keep military out of it, no?
    - CaptSpify 10y ago
      Sure he sponsored the roads, but the government implemented those roads. Planning, buying, organizing, maintaining, etc are all part of the work that the government does.
      - joering2 10y ago
        I still don't get it. Who do you think paid for planning, buying, organizing and the cost of maintaining of all that??
        10y ago

joering2 10y ago

... and its important to say, as experience shows, at this point its sadly irrelevant what average americans say. while OP is right -- this doesn't seem to serve majority, the truth is that the system is rigged and this supposed to serve a few multinational corporations that feel their profits are severely cut due to copyright infringement, meanwhile posting record earnings. it is still mind-boggling to me that this non-US human being doing allegedly non-violent crime will probably end up serving 25 years in american prison (wire fraud is a magic word in LE indictments) for a bunch of bits being configured the way to organize in magnet links that sharing of - as far as I know, similarly to URLs, had been found in courts around the world as a non-infringing act.

2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
> the truth is that the system is rigged and this supposed to serve a few > multinational corporations that feel their profits are severely cut due > to copyright infringement, meanwhile posting record earnings. Ignore that the system is rigged for the moment. I think it is safe to say these companies really like making more money. I have always wondered why then, they spend so much effort enforcing copyright laws rather than trying alternative methods to solve the problem and make more money. E.g I know a lot of people who have some unblocking service and Netflix. Now they could increase prices for Netflix, so we wouldn't need the unblocking, but that's not on the cards. They would rather spend their efforts blocking me. Is this purely to satisfy contractual obligations? I'd assume that any existing contracts must be in place for such a long time that making changes can't be done for quite a few years into the future and there is no realistic way to amend existing contracts. The contracts would have to cover new productions too. Otherwise, this whole thing makes no sense to me. They appear to be giving up revenue, for no benefit to themselves.
- chongli 10y ago
  Contracts with regional exclusivity give the content producers something a subscription model never will: a lump sum of risk free, up-front cash. People calling for global Netflix kumba ya with all content available are simply asking for producers to take a haircut.