t16t Pirate Radio

[Aquagraph]

I will be channeling Pirate agenda propaganda in this thread and you are free to do the same.



So what is the Pirate Agenda?

Civil rights

Live and let live! Do whatever you want as long as you don't restrict the freedoms of others!

Reform of copyright and patent law

Sharing is caring and I would download a car if I could! We won't allow the entertainment industry to lobby for policing the internet. Instead of just giving freedom of speech we can offer freedom of information. The entertainment industry has to keep up with the progress, adapt or die.

Information privacy

We don't need the Big Brother to eavesdrop on us. Just because you don't want to be listened doesn't mean that you are a criminal or a terrorist. The state that listens to dissenters is a terrorist lurking on it's citizens and the breeding grounds for tyranny.

Transparency

Let's make public sector public. We don't need laws passed behind closed doors. Let's turn the table and start listening on the people who pretend to be for our benefit.

Freedom of information and network

Closing down sites that might have illegal material on them is a move that is only made by those who don't understand the nature of internet or who really want to bring forth the police state. How would we even know when something is illegally censored? Censorship sucks because **** *** **** ***** *****.

Here's the founder of the first Pirate Party (in Sweden), political evangelist Rick Falkvinge introducing his message of protest:

[Pa3s]

Unfortunately, the German Pirate Party has quite a few idiots and hypocrites in it and degenerated into a bunch of pissed off kids a while ago. I'll be able to choose among 38 parties in the federal election in september and not a single one is worth voting for.

[Capitalist Pig]

[Capitalist Pig]

There's an excellent book that was written in 1976 and has garnered a lot of attention in libertarian circles recently. It's called Defending the Undefendable by Walter Block (PDF e-book, YouTube videos), that "defends 'capitalist acts between consenting adults' that most people would consider horrifying and showing that they are actually beneficial" (from Mises Wiki). The original title read Defending the Undefendable: The pimp, prostitute, scab, slumlord, libeler, moneylender, and other scapegoats in the rogue's gallery of American society. I highly recommend it to everyone, regardless of how you conceive your political or economic leanings. I especially recommend it if you don't have any strong political convictions and shy away from that sort of thing.

Here are some excerpts from the book and articles about it that were featured on the Mises Institute website:

• Defending the Blackmailer
• Defending the Advertiser
• Defending the Stereotype
• Defending the Slumlord

[Iris]

__
Yar!

[Absurd]

Crap for business, besides you don't have to have the state to spy on you - your fellow pirates, may. And pulling a libertarian stunt in predominantly social-democratic societies is a bit lul.

Of course people may be satisfied with 1-2% vote, and again, I don't have to mention libertarians do not really want to associate themselves with parties of any kind, nor the word party itself, in a political fashion of course.

But hey, I only know/knew conservative-libertarians.

[Aquagraph]

Russia wants to ban cursing on internet, ******s.

[Aquagraph]

Bradley Manning, a soldier who leaked information about unlawful government activity, is now acquitted the worst accusation, "aiding the enemy". He won't be getting a death penalty but might still get a decade of prison.

Obama also removed his promise to defend the rights of whistleblowers from his old campaign site.

[mu4]

[*]Defending the Slumlord[/list]

The slumlord is defensible for sure. They exist and often within the confines of the law. When slumlords become the norm for a majority of the population, the ressentiment and desire to overthrow these individuals get to a certain point people will act outside of outside of moral reason.

They're defensible to be sure, but also often murdered in a orgy of bloodthirsty vengeance. Three cheers for bloodthirsty vengeance. Quentin Tarantino should make a movie.

Defending economic rent is extremely banal and almost every economist view rent seeking as a dangerous path to follow and not capitalistic. Economic rent is a tolerable arrangement but it's not a desirable one with many moral hazards. The defense of slumlords makes slumlords similar to a grocer, but that's not the case.

Even a seller of poor quality goods does not engage in rent seeking, while a slumlord does while offering a fraudulent service.

You can defend the slumlords and such all you want, but I'll defend the revolutionary.

He sells his life to kill slumlords, blackmailers, oppressors and provides justice and vengeance to those that will support them.

Anyways that book seem like a defense of all sort of status quo BS. Anyways, why do you always have to like write what other say carbon copy, it's like you're little more than a mouthpiece cheerleader for these ideologues you follow. Doesn't seem very piraty or individualistic.

[InvisibleJim]

Exerpts

My favourite statement in all of these articles...

Defending the Undefendable is fun because it is provocative, and if there is a shortage of anything in this world, it is provocateurs. The planet is overrun with narcissistic conformists who deserve to — nay, must — be exposed as the puny, prevaricating poltroons they are. A good dose of strapping logic, which Walter Block supplies in Defending the Undefendable, is the politically incorrect antidote to their interventionist venom.

[Aquagraph]

Anyways that book seem like a defense of all sort of status quo BS. Anyways, why do you always have to like write what other say carbon copy, it's like you're little more than a mouthpiece cheerleader for these ideologues you follow. Doesn't seem very piraty or individualistic.

How is Austrian economics status quo? Currently many 1st world citizens pay nearly 50% of what they spend and earn to the state. Bluntly put, you're a bitch to the State 4 hours a day if you work for 8 hours a day. That is not freedom. Especially when that money is used to steal your drugs, spy on you, militarize the police and attack brown people overseas.

Pirate Parties don't have a strong party discipline on economic issues, but it is easily argued that civil rights involve laissez-faire mentality on many topics, so why not property as well.

[mu4]

How is Austrian economics status quo? Currently many 1st world citizens pay nearly 50% of what they spend and earn to the state. Bluntly put, you're a bitch to the State 4 hours a day if you work for 8 hours a day. That is not freedom. Especially when that money is used to steal your drugs, spy on you, militarize the police and attack brown people overseas.

Pirate Parties don't have a strong party discipline on economic issues, but it is easily argued that civil rights involve laissez-faire mentality on many topics, so why not property as well.

Instead of paying the state 50% in taxes for stuff like defense, roads and healthcare, why don't you pay a slumlord 50-90% in rent. That's the reality of slumlords and what happens.

There are good and bad governments, just as there are good and bad landlords.

I don't really care about the states or some level of economic rent seeking. It's tolerable to me, but slumlords and bad government I have no problem with the violent overthrow of both.

I don't think you really understand the nature of taxation today, in the past the vast majority of individual payed far more than 50% tax or paid a vast majority of their production in rent or on necessities such as food. Taxes in the past were vastly regressive, with most of the tax burden laid upon the poorest. Which is why anti-tax rhetoric were far more effective in creating revolutions, today, the poor don't pay taxes beyond sales/vat/and some fees. Good luck trying to start a revolution.

The audience for Austrian economic has no revolutionary background, they are the money man and the power men, as well as the lackeys and lick-spittle of the aristocracy. They may not be the status quo of today(thankfully), but they represent the status quo of yesterday.

I happen to think taxes such as sales tax and VAT are highly regressive, but I don't have a problem with most property taxes or progressive income taxes and as such I'm ok with some taxes and not ok with others.

I'm ok as long as there are at least some decent services provided, it does not place the burden of taxation on the poor, it does not disenfranchise people and used as a tool to oppress those who do not have the ability to pay. As a vast number of people pay little to no taxes in the western world, especially those who can't pay. I don't have a huge problem with it. Do you actually pay taxes Aqua beyond sales tax or a VAT?(A lot of so called conservatives seem to be quite ok with this sort of tax)

Anyways for a sensible tax plan, reduce sales taxes and VAT and cover the revenue deficiency with progressive taxation. It's simple and effective, also it reduces GINI index and wealth disparity.

Anyways if you want to live somewhere without a state which has a monopoly on force, I recommend you visit some refugee camps, they can tell you where you can find some nice real estate if you got some guns and manpower and are willing to fight life and death battles every so often.

As for the pirate party, I agree with most of the pirate party, especially where they are left-libertarian, as I consider myself a left-libertarian. However, where it is right-libertarian, I generally find it's corrupt and degenerate. Most right wing thinkers would consider Pirate Party to be socialist or left wing.

[mu4]

Unfortunately, the German Pirate Party has quite a few idiots and hypocrites in it and degenerated into a bunch of pissed off kids a while ago. I'll be able to choose among 38 parties in the federal election in september and not a single one is worth voting for.

Greed is inevitably a factor. I'm not against intellectual property in some situations, but I think the limits of what can be owned should be more strict and the duration of copyrights and patents reduced. I see piracy as civil disobedience until a cheap, affordable solution can be found.

Streaming video and services such as Netflix, Spotify and Rhapsody will eliminate a large amount of piracy in the future. Books are a harder topic but I think a service model would work here as well.

I think information doesn't have to be "free", but it should be almost free.

[Aquagraph]

I think information doesn't have to be "free", but it should be almost free.

And how would you enforce the law against those who download illegally?

As far as I know, your avatar from "100 bullets" is illegal.

[Aquagraph]

Either hypocrisy or poor understanding on the part of the intellectual property law.

Pirate Party Reports IT Minister to the Police for Copyright Infringement

Politician Violates His Own Two-Strikes Anti-Piracy Plan

[mu4]

And how would you enforce the law against those who download illegally?

As far as I know, your avatar from "100 bullets" is illegal.

I wouldn't enforce the laws against downloaders. I would say my use of the avatar should be under "fair use" as I'm not monetizing my use, or using it in some sort of political propaganda.

Thumbnails happens to be covered under fair use explicitly after a court case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

This was done by the EFF another organization I have donated to. Thanks buddies.

Anyways I don't think piracy(demand side) should ever be criminal, but thee's a big difference between counterfeit software sellers and a downloader.

[Taknamay]

I don't think there's anything terrible about the degree of copyright laws, although I don't buy the moral argument, they just last way too long. Noncommercial distribution should be more permitted, though I am not sure to what degree. Copyright should, at the very most, terminate upon death. The purpose of copyright is to fund creators to continue producing works. Nobody produces works after death.

[InvisibleJim]

Hi, I just found this thread.

Excellent video.

[Aquagraph]

“How Should Artists Get Paid?” Isn’t a Question, it’s an Insult

[Aquagraph]

Netflix uses pirate traffic to determine what people want easier access to and seems to decrease piracy.

[Aquagraph]

“A cyber attack on the U.S. could be met with a conventional military response.”
– chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army General Martin E. Dempsey

If a "cyber attack" is something that can be seen as an initiation of aggression, aren't most Western governments in war with their own citizens?

NSA has even named it's covert programs after civil war battles. Namely Bullrun and Manassas. Also GCHQ (NSA's British counter-part) has named it's program similair to bullrun as Edgehill (A battle in First English Civil War).

[InvisibleJim]

“A cyber attack on the U.S. could be met with a conventional military response.”
– chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army General Martin E. Dempsey

If a "cyber attack" is something that can be seen as an initiation of aggression, aren't most Western governments in war with their own citizens?

NSA has even named it's covert programs after civil war battles. Namely Bullrun and Manassas. Also GCHQ (NSA's British counter-part) has named it's program similair to bullrun as Edgehill (A battle in First English Civil War).

The US and UK governments have been in a cold war with outbreaks of violence with their own citizens for hundreds of years. We've just got to educate the continentals to understand that government is bad.

[Capitalist Pig]

The purpose of copyright is to fund creators to continue producing works.

Bullshit. All you have to do is come up with a good idea once, copyright it, and anyone who wants to use it has to lease the rights from you and pay you royalties. If you have a single idea that is successful enough, there is no incentive to continue innovating. You're already getting paid for your original idea beyond it's initial sale. The economic argument against intellectual property focuses on the fact that ideas are intangible and their supply is not scarce. To claim someone has proprietary rights to a concept is absurd.

If you only get paid for your idea once, then it is up to you to continue creating successful, profitable ideas so you may be paid in the future. This is why anti-IP'ers argue that copyrights and patents actually stifle creativity.

Additionally, it hinders improvements on the original idea because the people legally allowed to manipulate and market the "thing" is limited by who is willing to pay for the rights (increasing the cost of development), and whether or not the proprietor is willing to sell the rights to the same. It creates virtual monopolies on ideas that become happy hunting grounds for patent trolls and the like.

[Taknamay]

Bullshit. All you have to do is come up with a good idea once, copyright it, and anyone who wants to use it has to lease the rights from you and pay you royalties. If you have a single idea that is successful enough, there is no incentive to continue innovating. You're already getting paid for your original idea beyond it's initial sale. The economic argument against intellectual property focuses on the fact that ideas are intangible and their supply is not scarce. To claim someone has proprietary rights to a concept is absurd.

If you only get paid for your idea once, then it is up to you to continue creating successful, profitable ideas so you may be paid in the future. This is why anti-IP'ers argue that copyrights and patents actually stifle creativity.

Additionally, it hinders improvements on the original idea because the people legally allowed to manipulate and market the "thing" is limited by who is willing to pay for the rights (increasing the cost of development), and whether or not the proprietor is willing to sell the rights to the same. It creates virtual monopolies on ideas that become happy hunting grounds for patent trolls and the like.

Well, of course it's efficacy is in question-- I am not a staunch defender of the system, I am just commenting based on the arguments I have seen. What I meant was that this is the only legitimate (if only in principle) argument in defence of copyright that I have observed. Other arguments, like moral arguments (I thought of it, therefore I own it forever) I don't even see as worth considering (because it is wrong, even in principle).

[Jinxi]

The US is stupid. Fuck America!

[mu4]

Bullshit. All you have to do is come up with a good idea once, copyright it, and anyone who wants to use it has to lease the rights from you and pay you royalties. If you have a single idea that is successful enough, there is no incentive to continue innovating. You're already getting paid for your original idea beyond it's initial sale. The economic argument against intellectual property focuses on the fact that ideas are intangible and their supply is not scarce. To claim someone has proprietary rights to a concept is absurd.

If you only get paid for your idea once, then it is up to you to continue creating successful, profitable ideas so you may be paid in the future. This is why anti-IP'ers argue that copyrights and patents actually stifle creativity.

Additionally, it hinders improvements on the original idea because the people legally allowed to manipulate and market the "thing" is limited by who is willing to pay for the rights (increasing the cost of development), and whether or not the proprietor is willing to sell the rights to the same. It creates virtual monopolies on ideas that become happy hunting grounds for patent trolls and the like.

I think there is a wide variance with how people think. I think having some copyright laws are fine, and intellectual property is not any more invalid than private property. I actually see physical private property as having bigger issues than copyright.

The problem is the new types of patents that exists which are essentially process patents, which encompasses future innovations which don't yet exist. This has created a situation which both legal and illegal entities essentially dismiss the law. Large corporations allocate funds for patent battles while individual entities copy and use without paying the licensing fees. This is bad situation for any sort of individual creator, because individual creators have to cozy up with either big corporation/VC with their legal prowess or organization such as EFF and open source community which also provides legal protection. Anyways, I find idea creation fairly unprofitable, many of the profiteers of today did not make money thru idea creation, they did it thru control of production while taking control ideas that are either obvious or relatively well known. Execution, control of production, monetization and marketing is the way to go.

Copyright problems are a different issue, and this has mostly to do with Disney and the length of certain copyrights that has been extended for a long period of time. Both these situations make intellectual property rights last longer than intended which hurts creativity and progress. All private property rights actually have this problem, not just intellectual property rights.

This is mostly US centric, but Europe and Asia are going to get there soon enough.

BTW, Ideas can't be copyrighted. There are some situations where process patents can get into idea territory. These patents last a maximum of 20 years, however in some situations patents will be given for hypothetical processes.

One of the big problem of processes is that many modern and novel processes require a large amount of existing production capability and expertise to materialize, and until things like individual production catches up, the result will be no better than backyard furnaces of Mao's Great Leap Forward. It's kinda of funny that today's MakerBot is no different that Backyard Furnaces, the good thing is that personal production mechanisms will likely achieve success with some missteps along the way.

[kadda1212]

I agree with most of the Pirate Party's manifesto. In Germany there's also a Pirate Party, as has been mentioned before, I think. Yes, I made a test before the elections and got a really high percentage of consensus with their plans and opinions. Problem is they are a bunch of lazy gamer guys and hipster emo girls - one of my friends from school is active in that party, so I kind of can imagine what kind of people they are. They are basically not capable of putting their ideas into action. They don't have any kind of experience in politics, because they are mostly quite young. I mean, I also have some nice ideas of how things should be, but do I know how to put them in reality? Probably not. Politics is complicated. So I rather vote for other parties, who have been there for a while.

The only thing they actually really care about is, whether it's allowed to go dancing in a club on Good Friday anyway. Most of the party's members are atheists/agnostics and they feel oppressed because that one day, Good Friday, is a Christian holiday and in Germany a so-called silent holiday, meaning it's forbidden to dance on that day. Shops are closed, too. But that's not what they are pissed off about. Everybody is happy for getting a leave day. But they are completely hurt because society "forces them" to use the day for silent contemplation, because they are not Christian. -__- I don't unterstand, why they make such a fuss about it.

[Aquagraph]

This is a bit old but Finnish Pirate hunters extorted a 11 year old girl and confiscated her Winnie the Pooh laptop.

[Aquagraph]

They don't have any kind of experience in politics, because they are mostly quite young. I mean, I also have some nice ideas of how things should be, but do I know how to put them in reality? Probably not. Politics is complicated. So I rather vote for other parties, who have been there for a while.

Pirate politicians have to start from somewhere. Once green parties were bearded men who chained themselves to trees.

The only thing they actually really care about is, whether it's allowed to go dancing in a club on Good Friday anyway. Most of the party's members are atheists/agnostics and they feel oppressed because that one day, Good Friday, is a Christian holiday and in Germany a so-called silent holiday, meaning it's forbidden to dance on that day. Shops are closed, too. But that's not what they are pissed off about. Everybody is happy for getting a leave day. But they are completely hurt because society "forces them" to use the day for silent contemplation, because they are not Christian. -__- I don't unterstand, why they make such a fuss about it.

Well, it's a bit of a non-issue but the separation of the Church and State is very important to many even in principle.
We still have legislation against blasphemy and I consider it unconstitutional.

[Aquagraph]

GHCQ, the British equivalent of NSA is probably guilty of breaking British laws against child pornography. It has saved still pictures from 1.8 million users during their webcam chats. This involves nude minors.. ..ahem.. cybering.

The proportion of nude photos amongst all of them is 4 to 7 percent and the camera took pictures every five minutes. By this rate they have probably been one of the most industrious gatherers of child porn.

[Creepy-male]

Comrades, the time for deliberation has past, we need to kick some virtual ass and I know just the man to do it:

Attachment 3177

[Aquagraph]

McBain, the sad part is that if the Snowden Leaks are right, Orwell was an optimist.

[Creepy-male]

McBain, the sad part is that if the Snowden Leaks are right, Orwell was an optimist.

Well, we can get bogged down in the mire or be merry in the fight. I choose the latter.

[Aquagraph]

Well, we can get bogged down in the mire or be merry in the fight. I choose the latter.

Oh, didn't see the text you added. I was being a bit too defensive. Good to have you on our side but.. "comrades".. well okay sure.

[Creepy-male]

Oh, didn't see the text you added. I was being a bit too defensive. Good to have you on our side but.. "comrades".. well okay sure.

No worries, on a whim I sometimes just throw random acts of humor into situations -- mostly imagined -- that I find absurd and hilarious and nobody else gets it because I fail to provide context. The "comrades" is part of the joke. In general, to me any political activist movement ought to be able throw a hefty dose of humor onto themselves every once and awhile to maintain that honest vigor. Too much seriousness can be dangerous. I tend toward Buddha humor -- everything is funny, the ultimate nature is laughter. Wait, I forget that this forum is international -- do you even know Jesse Ventura?

[Capitalist Pig]

The Production of Security (1849) by Gustave de Molinari. Be sure to read the preface written by Murray Rothbard for context.

[kadda1212]

Pirate politicians have to start from somewhere. Once green parties were bearded men who chained themselves to trees.
Well, it's a bit of a non-issue but the separation of the Church and State is very important to many even in principle.
We still have legislation against blasphemy and I consider it unconstitutional.

Separation of church and state is one thing, culture another. You shouldn't abolish your country's culture while aiming for tolerance. That happens in communism, I guess, but not in a democracy.

[Aquagraph]

toward Buddha humor -- everything is funny, the ultimate nature is laughter. Wait, I forget that this forum is international -- do you even know Jesse Ventura?

Yeah, I'm familiar with his show.

Separation of church and state is one thing, culture another. You shouldn't abolish your country's culture while aiming for tolerance. That happens in communism, I guess, but not in a democracy.

Separation of state and church implies that no religion should have special priviledges in legislation. Abolishing this is not abolishing culture. Violently forcing businesses to close and stopping people from dancing is abolishing culture just like forcing Christians to not to celebrate it would be.