Scratch

16Skittles wrote:

Scratchthatguys wrote:

Don't you know OpenCongress would be taken down if it passed? XP

Anyways, the first voting passed it and then they put it on hold.

Brad Burnham wrote:

At a dinner earlier this week, Joi Ito, the head of the Media Lab at MIT described the Internet as a “belief system” and I suddenly understood. The Internet is not just a series of pipes. It’s core architecture embeds an assumption about human nature. The Internet is designed to empower individuals not control them. It assumes that the if individuals are empowered, they will do the right thing the vast majority of the time. Services like eBay, Craigslist, Etsy and AirBnB are built on the assumption that most people are honest. Other services like Tumblr, Twitter, YouTube, Wordpress, and Soundcloud assume people will be generous with their ideas, insights and creations. Wikipedia has proven that people will share their knowledge. Companies like Kickstarter show that people will even be generous with their money. This does not mean that there are not bad people out there. All of these companies spend a lot of time and money to battle spam and fraud. The companies are simply betting that there are many more good people than bad. The architecture of the Internet shares this assumption. It could have been designed to prevent bad behavior. Instead its design empowers good behavior.

The entertainment industry does not share this view of human nature.

Whether you agree with me that the vast majority of people are good or with my friend that given a chance many people will steal is not really important. What is important is that PIPA, and SOPA, the legislation the content industry is currently pushing through Congress, will not allow me to architect a service and build a relationship with consumers that reflects my core beliefs about human nature. If I am a search engine and I remove sites from my index, I am essentially lying to my users. If I am a social media site and I remove links my users have posted to sites that some authority has deemed illegal, I am breaking a promise.

I am sympathetic to the content industries struggles with piracy, but my belief system tells me the answer is to capitalize on the great strengths of the Internet to create a healthy and profitable relationship with their users not to sue them. No matter how strongly I believe that, however, I do not think I have the right to tell them how to run their business. Apparently, they do not feel the same way about our businesses. The current legislation in Congress does not just create an administrative burden, it requires service providers who have built wonderful businesses on a deep conviction about human nature to change their relationship with their users in a way that subverts their core values.

MIT said it shouldn't pass 

That is possibly the best possible way to put it.

MAYBE it isn't bad. But what makes it good? This may slow down piracy, but those who break the law are perfectly capable of doing it again, finding ways to bypass this. It's like banning a library because some books talk about things which are illegal, and may inspire people to do it themselves. it does MORE HARM THAN GOOD.

Right, since without a library people won't learn how to stop illegal activities and items. I mean, if you pirate something you have to have a loophole. There has to be some way through it to make it mess up. I agree. It is pure harm to the internet.

My mom will miss you, Facebook. 

I'll miss you, Scratch. 

I Won't miss you, Club Penguin. 

The only way this could pass:

DIVIDING BY ZERO.

You are overreacting too much. Also, WE DONT NEED 8 TOPICS ABOUT THIS!!!!!

Yes, I counted

imnotbob wrote:

Dude! It's not like the internet will die! Not all sites will be taken down!
jeesh

illusionist wrote:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … ngress.jpg

It is this guy's idea. Congressman Lamar Smith.

*throws a napkin at him*

veggieman001 wrote:

Wickimen wrote:

illusionist wrote:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … ngress.jpg

It is this guy's idea. Congressman Lamar Smith.

*throws a napkin at him*

:O
VIOLENT

:OOO

JJROCKER wrote:

veggieman001 wrote:

Wickimen wrote:

*throws a napkin at him*

VIOLENT

I know! That's dangerous!

He could be allergic to napkin fiber >:^{D

JJROCKER wrote:

Wickimen wrote:

JJROCKER wrote:

I know! That's dangerous!

He could be allergic to napkin fiber >:^{D

I have a plan. Lets get the same kind of napkins and try throwing them at his napkin so it will avoid hitting the guys face.

Mwahahahahahahahahahhahaahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahhaha [insert numerous more ha's]

Pecola1 wrote:

GUYS LIKE JD1 SAID IT MIGHT NOT BE REALLY BAD AT ALL, YOU LOOKED AT SITES WHICH MADE IT LOOK BAD, BUT MAYBE IT ISN'T.
SO PLEASE STOP ACTING LIKE ITS THE END OF THE WORLD!

Thank you. 

But it includes videos on youtube containing game footage. That means all of those commentary videos everyone worked hard on? Gone. Walkthroughs? Nope. Minecraft? Sorry.

whattttt
so now if i filmed a video and lady gaga was playing in background they could sue me

whattttttttttttttttttttttt

Thats what the pessimist sites say.
SOMEONE FIND AN OPTIMISTIC SITE!

And if it really is what we think it is, then thats why this will be the 3rd time it doesn't pass.