Kawlinz

yeah it depends on how it's used. I think there are genuinely creepy people out there, and in my experience they tend to be guys. If calling them creepy stops them from hitting on you inappropriately, I think it's a good use of the word.

Hey, I'm taller than most of the population, don't dare come for my shins!

the short answer - whoever wants to!

I was addressing what I do when the hypothetical people in the hypothetical situation that Rothbard proposed come to blame me for not voting, and why they do it. Of course it mirrors what people say in the real world with political voting. I wasn't addressing your response to the quote, only the quote. In the name of less confusion - If you want to vote, that's cool, but I don't think that getting voluntarists elected would do anything. Anything that goes "wrong" would be pointed out, saying "see? this is what happens when you try less government". Government relies on propaganda, and would have no reason not to scare everyone into being good little citizens.

Not you specifically, I was just referring to your example / quote. Please point out where I said you were blaming me.

When people come to me and blame for not voting "it's your fault we're getting tortured, if only you'd VOTED!" it's not my fault, it's the aggressors fault. Blaming the non-voter is a scapegoat to avoid the real and horrifying issue - there are monsters who aggress and many people cheer it on.

Why doesn't he hire everyone directly?

Yep - you got us all.

I can see legit reasons for excluding men like talking about feminine hygiene and all that. But they don't have feminine hygiene clubs as far as I'm aware.

I don't think any muscian has paid for the right to use a major scale, minor scale, or any of the other scales that sound pleasing to the ear. They don't pay to use a certain rhythm, a certain tempo, specific instruments. I don't see the need to protect specific notes under "IP" or what would even qualify.

I think even in a deterministic framework, causation can be probabalisitic. I don't think it dismisses the framework at all. Either way, saying "x caused me to Y"... well, what caused X? And before that? it always go back to the big bang (or before, if that makes sense) What does hurt the framework is that no one attempts to share concepts with a car in order for it to get better gas miliage.

That's the exact opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying that it's funny where people stop when they say X caused me to do it. I'm suggesting, that if you're a determinist, you should really be saying that "the big bang made me do it" or "all the previous forces that act upon my body." Anything else would be arbitrary, wouldn't it?

Professional Teabagger already nailed it outta the park so I don't know the conversation is continuing.

Lots of people do things to attempt and make a living and they don't pan out. That's the "so" part. You didn't present a rebuttal, you just said a bunch of stuff you don't like. I took 20 years to perfect being a rapper. If you want to get a copy of my music for free of charge, that's cool. If I want people to pay for it AND have people who don't pay for it not hear it, I've got to come up with a model to do that. You know what the worst model is for doing that? making decent music, putting it in a form that can be easily and anonymously copyied by anyone - that's a recipe for failure, yeah? So who will take 20 years to perfect something that can easily be COPIED (not stolen) by anyone? me. I did. And I don't work on a farm. Yeah I work a day job but that's on me if i want to make a living from music. I'm not demanding anyone do anything. I'm a fucking anarchist. you wanna charge people for your songs, be my guest. Shit, I've bought music that was made available for free by the artists themselves, I must be crazy? So where does the fraud occur in the chair example? Fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual. So, do you have a different definition of fraud? I don't see the deception when you copy a chair, regardless of the state of permission from the original creator. maybe I'm missing something but I honestly don't think I am. The only reason i bring up the teleportation ideas taking over old technology, is that your rebuttal consists of "well, they guy want to make money from what he's put his life into learning, and denying him that opportunity is wrong / immoral" We'll make it simpler then, without the new technology. A guy owns a horse ranch. It's actually the first horse ranch ever. is it fraud for me to also open a horse ranch without his permission? Do you think the people who pay for stef's premium content would just stop because some guy posts it on some torrent site? maybe a few but i doubt it would be many... why? again, stef's work is valuable and they wanna pay the guy responsible for the concepts - even if they're freely copyable. All it comes down to - I think - is pointing out where the initiation of force or fraud (deception) occurs in copying something. If you can't do that, then you don't have a leg to stand on. I'll even define what I mean by the terms... Force is intentional violence threatened or committed against a person. Fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual. Copy is to arrange property in a similar or identical fashion to another arrangement of property. Do those definitions work for you?