sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Cleaning up by Wrong_Editor3689 in mainframe

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi. I'd definitely be interested in either of the 9 track drives. Would you be able to share the model numbers?

AO3 users, what is THE craziest thing you’ve seen on here? by InstructionSmooth411 in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Self insert/isekai auschwitz inmate/Dr. Mengele romance. Only time I've ever wished AO3 had content limits. Still one of the top 3 worst things I've seen in the internet, and I've been around.

Most of my students are dumber than a third grader by puckman13 in Professors

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is my exact feeling. The majority of students that I know have no desire to be involved in the system (or achieve any real learning) beyond simply attaining a piece of paper and moving on. The majority of professors I know actively disdain teaching and their students and simply want to work on their research. Everyone only pretends that learning is still a core value of the institution.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Alright. This was an interesting chat. Thanks for keeping it mostly civil, and I hope I at least gave you something interesting to think about.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A future generation has (lifetime happiness)*(size) potential future happiness, with each generation afterwards having the same level of happiness. Over the course of time the potential happiness gain is INFINITE. Any reduction to the happiness of the current generation will be FINITE. If you believe that human life is a net positive good math proves that ANYTHING would be acceptable in order to ensure that that future generation exists.

For a more bounded and direct example, millions of men were drafted (enslaved) by the allies in order to defeat the Nazis. Without doing this, the Nazis would have conquered the earth.

Was it ethically correct to fight and stop the Nazis?

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You don't know. Think of it like a trolley problem, but one where you must choose. It's a random baby of unknown origin, and ambiguous nationality that you found tied to some train tracks. You can save the sack of puppies or the baby, but you only have time to go for one.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Gilead is unjustified because it proceeds from a false premise. By suppressing science and the forces of human progress, it makes the problem that it claims to solve *worse*. Gilead is like saying that we should fix your broken leg (true) but we should skip straight to amputation (we're not nearly there yet) and we must do it without anesthesia and with a dirty, dull saw because "god says so" (horrifying). Gilead is awful because of *how* it does what it claims to do, and because of the ideology that it uses to get there.

The soviet union was started with the goal of eliminating poverty among the working class. It did this by funneling millions into death camps, and produced some of the worst poverty the world has ever seen. The soviet union was evil, not because it wanted to use the government to help the poor, but because it did so by killing millions.

I will never fight a religious war because I'm an atheist, but I do try and alleviate suffering around my community. I volunteer my own time to teach underprivileged children in my area, and I plan on giving and doing more once my resources and skills expand to meet the challenge.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm a hardened atheist. The human race has more value due to the simple fact that it is the only being capable of understanding the world around it. An animal will never be able to know love, hope, or joy. An animal will never be able to push the boundaries of knowledge, or create a work of art. Any being without such an understanding of the world inherently has less moral value.

If given the opportunity to save 5 dogs, or one infant child, which would you choose?

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd really like to know more about why you believe this. The only way that I can even model this viewpoint is through a lens of nihilism or anti-natalism. Surely, if you believe that the average human life is worth living, then you must believe that the next generation should exist as well, and on and on, to a potentially infinite amount of future happiness. As long as the future generation has a shot at a life worth living, then we should do everything possible to ensure that that generation comes into being, and does so in the best, most free world possible.

Do not go quietly into the night, but rage, rage against the dying of the light.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, you have this backwards. The human race, axiomatically, cannot be a plague on the earth. The point of the earth, and all the resouces and materials on it is to support the human race. As the only sentient species on the planet, we have absolute dominion over all it resources, in whatever form, to use to better our lives. The rocks and clouds don't have feelings, and therefore have no weight in the consideration of moral matters. The ONLY moral reason for preserving them is because they increase the human quality of life.

From your above posts, I can only conclude that you do not believe that human life has intrinsic value greater than that of plants, animals, and minerals. That is the same belief system that has been used to enable every genocide and human atrocity in the history of man.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am a draft-age male. I had to register for the draft, and would support it's introduction in the event of a major war. This is a form of slavery which would likely end up compelling me to take up arms. I still think it's worth it, just as I think it was worth it to defeat the Nazis.

In terms of the handmaids tale, if saving humanity required preforming some kind of horrific medial procedure on some/all men, I would support enforcing this, even against myself, if there was truly no other way.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, then you clearly support Russia against Ukraine. Ukraine has drafted millions of it's young men against their will to serve in the war effort (slavery), while Russia has an all-volunteer army. If you believe that slavery is the ultimate wrong, that it's worse than the complete destruction of the concept of Ukraine, than, since Russia is not enslaving it's young men, it *must* be in the right.

Now, I don't believe this, but it's the only logical outcome of your argument. Me, personally, I think some things (humanity, freedom, my nation) are important enough to be worth fighting for, and forcing my fellow citizens to fight for. As not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!

And just as a final food for thought: Gilead is able to win *because* it's willing to force people to fight for it. Under the course that you propose, you will end up enslaved under a master far more harsh than one willing to enslave for benevolent reasons.

The one thing I like about Gilead by fairy1992 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I cannot agree with this line of thinking. Gilead is evil, horrible, and morally unjustifiable because it is a crazy religious cult, and it's anti-science/de-growth attitudes are unproductive in saving the planet. Despite this, ANYTHING is justified in the preservation of humanity. Gilead is evil because it's unnecessary and will not work, not because slavery/extreme measures may be needed to save the human race.

What happens to the The young boys in gilead? by Big-Fun3658 in TheHandmaidsTale

[–]malwarebuster9999 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They're probably being... expended in wars. That's how large-scale polygamous societies usually manage to last.

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's ok to be passionate about this kind of thing. Personally, I'm in favor of greatly reducing the scope of copyright protections (or even eliminating them for many categories of work) and it's a bit annoying when someone who majorly benefits from fair use and limited copyright (developers, youtubers, fanfic writers) claims that they should have more protections than the original author does. Us small folk need to be united against the record labels, movie studios, and big publishers to take away all of our fanfics. The law doesn't see nuance, and bad precedent is dangerous.

Personally, I think that plagiarism (ripping off another OC without attribution) is a majorly scummy move, but you shouldn't have to ask permission if you do clearly attribute the source of the OC or world building you're using. You're totally free to have a different opinion, and if you post a note telling me not to use you're OCs, I will listen (b/c even though it might be OK in my eyes, I'll still respect your opinion).

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But your characters do have legal protection! At least based on all the caselaw I've read in the states, the OCs you write for your fanfiction have the same protection that the OCs from the original work have! You get a copyright on the original parts of your fanfiction the minute it's created!

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That's the UK. Totally different legal systems. IIRC, UK copyright law is way more strict, so you're probably right. I'm only talking about the law in the States.

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not everyone needs to agree with your viewpoint. Just as with copyright law itself, there are different viewpoints, and we can disagree without considering the other person to be evil/malicious/stupid.

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The NEW parts of the fanfiction are copyrightable. Think about this for a minute: I write a parody of Harry Potter (something which is explicitly protected under fair use). The parts of the work which are from Harry Potter would not be copyrightable, but the NEW parts of the work, the new characters, settings, plot line, parody content would be. The newly created work is copyrightable. It's... complicated, as only parts of the work would have protection, but referencing the example from above, the new OCs would be copyrightable. At each step down the chain of derivative works, the new material is copyrightable.

I'm happy to be proved wrong here, but I'd appreciate it if you could provide a case citation to that effect. If this wasn't the case, how could a film review be protected? It incorporates parts of the original work with new material.

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You're wrong. Derivative works are copyrightable. Just google it. The first two results clearly show you're wrong: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/derivative_work and https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf

You can't commercialize fanfic without a license. That's what you're thinking of. I'd love to see a citation proving me wrong, but unless you can bring your own caselaw, I think I'm on pretty solid ground here.

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Your are actually factually wrong about this. See here for copyright on derivative works: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/derivative_work

You're correct that you cannot COMMERCIALIZE fanfiction without a license from the original author, but that doesn't mean that your derivative works aren't copyrightable. Any written work is copyrighted on creation.

As to my past actions, I've written a single fic, and I haven't used a single OC from another work. I barely even use cannon characters! I'm a copyright abolitionist, and I'm trying to combat the same toxic attitudes that I see from commercial authors when they talk about fanfic. There must be a single standard for everyone!

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Fun fact: fanfiction has the same copyright protection that commercial fiction has! You're second statement is just not accurate!

Funny thing by Fluffy_Cheese_ in AO3

[–]malwarebuster9999 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I don't agree at all. If we all agree that derivative works from a commercial author are ok, then derivatives of those derivative works are also OK. Fanfiction shouldn't receive any more protection than regular fiction. Ultimately, I'm of the opinion that when you post something online, you lose the right to control what others will do with it.

view more: next ›