wissler

105 ms·

421.
by wissler 14y ago
It costs far more than that. What's missing is the lost wealth due to things that weren't created but would have been, not only because people were afraid or unmotivated to create them but because of the money the trolls took.
422.
by wissler 14y ago
Sure. Which highlights the real problem. The original article obscures the point.
423.
by wissler 14y ago
Carriers could pay Google a maintenance fee to port Android instead of trying to do it themselves.
424.
by wissler 14y ago
How you or others "feel" is not a moral argument. And you do not understand the point of Dr. King's quote.
425.
by wissler 14y ago
Animal-derived products are not morally repugnant, and the framework of law is no substitute for having a good moral sense. "Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." --Martin Luther King, Jr.
426.
by wissler 14y ago
Well sure, they can have independent moral compasses, but they shouldn't. They both depend on a civilized society. Dropbox needs to uphold and defend the values of civilization (which don't include a paternalistic authoritarian monitoring
427.
by wissler 14y ago
What a bizarre thing to say. No one has disputed Dropbox's legal rights here. The question at issue is whether they are morally upstanding to make this decision or not. And guess what? It's my prerogative to state what I think on that top
428.
by wissler 14y ago
The original thread on this topic (that was evidently heavily flagged) is here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161940
429.
by wissler 14y ago
It's not implied. No one has disputed their legal rights, nor is it a "moral crusade" to at least try to do the right thing. On the contrary, given that you have plenty of resources, then not doing the right thing is dishonorable. Dropbox
430.
by wissler 14y ago
Is it your view that Twitter has "thrown themselves on their sword" when they went out of their way to defend the rights of their users against government subpoena? Or when they took a stand on software patents?
431.
by wissler 14y ago
I'm not a pirate. I don't even use torrents myself. But your admission that you have no argument, implied by your fabrication in order to make an ad hominem attack, is noted.
432.
by wissler 14y ago
While I agree with your free market principles, I do not agree with your application in this mixed economy context. Dropbox is not exactly a private company. The larger the company, the more it tends to be a branch of our government (via in
433.
by wissler 14y ago
Your argument is nonsense. You presume that the torrent feature implies something unsavory, akin to porn, when it's merely a means of copying from point A to point B efficiently. "Forgive my language, but do you see how stupid your argument
434.
by wissler 14y ago
That's because I was already doing that work in a different comment and don't want to repeat myself. Feel free to address my remarks there. I'm not saying it's not a complicated moral issue, but in my judgement it's far simpler when you're
435.
by wissler 14y ago
These rich corporations are de facto stewards of our political system. (That may not be the ideal way the political system should work, but that's how it does work, and the well-connected, well-funded fully exploit it). And the problem here
436.
by wissler 14y ago
The subject is "should Dropbox block the API" not "can Dropbox block the API." And yes, the saw liability and wanted to mitigate it -- at the expense of moral principle.
437.
by wissler 14y ago
Their behavior is unprincipled with respect to their customers. It is immoral. "Their company, their decision" is not a moral argument.
438.
by wissler 14y ago
"but a sane person could see how boxopus will likely be used for piracy." And a sane person could see how a butter knife could be used for murder.
439.
by wissler 14y ago
The presumption behind the chant is that what is legal is also moral, but that's clearly not the case, particularly in our ever more corrupt legal environment.
440.
by wissler 14y ago
On the one hand, this was predictable. On the other, it is unethical by Dropbox. What they said was telling: “It’s come to our attention that latest Boxopus features could be perceived as encouraging users to violate copyright using Dro
441.
by wissler 14y ago
Someone chanting that "it's Dropbox's API and they can do what they want" in 5, 4, 3, 2...
442.
by wissler 14y ago
"Wrong. He asks: "can you blog about how you spend your day running your biz?" followed by "What biz activities do you focus on now that the product is up?". "Biz" is referring to business, in case you didn't pick that up." Wow. Well, he's
443.
by wissler 14y ago
I know I am in the minority, but I happen to think that the central concern of any business ought to be to maximize end-user value. Profits are a means to that end, not the other way around. So I would evaluate the API issue from the pers
444.
by wissler 14y ago
People have a right to complain if they don't agree with a given company's decision. The fact that the company has a legal right to do something, or the (alleged) fact that they are basing their decision on "the bottom line", does not make
445.
by wissler 14y ago
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByyIBJqJ0pDBZDAyY2FhODUtYTY0...
446.
by wissler 14y ago
Corral everyone into centralized monetary dictatorships, and this is what happens. What did you expect? It doesn't matter how you design the monetary system, what matters is that it's centralized -- a mandated system backed by SWAT teams. C
447.
by wissler 14y ago
AKA boiling frog.
448.
by wissler 14y ago
How the fuck does bitching about irrelevancy earn the highest number of upvotes?
449.
by wissler 14y ago
Indeed. I was about to go contribute, but then I saw that it's a total concession in principle. I don't want haggling over how much when a robber robs me at gunpoint, I want the robber to be stopped. I don't want a concession to the princip
450.
by wissler 14y ago
The truth is, patents are not a poorly executed good idea; they are a morally indefensible, heinously evil idea. They are a more sophisticated feudalism, but feudalism nonetheless. There obvious moral truth is that no human being has the ri

More ›