Does anyone like Bill Maher? - Page 40

I suggest for your next project, you greenlight a movie based on The Professor and the Dominatrix. It should be a big hit among liberal, freethinking people. Just read those positive reviews on Amazon!

You've sidestepped my question by saying you 'can accept it' without actually revealing whether you agree or disagree (whether you endorse it, or merely put up with it). But this isn't surprising and is exactly why I asked you the question, as it should prove to you that the maxim of consumerism is incompatible with the maxim of piracy. So why is this important? Simple, these incompatibilities exist with other freedoms too, for example you can't support the right to abortion as well as the right to live, as a mother's choice to abort impedes on the freedom of the fetus' life by completely removing it. Similarly by agreeing earlier that you would be OK with people selling their babies, you were supporting a right for a mother to choose the residence of a child, and thus you were impeding the child's freedom to choose his or her residence. Furthermore with respect to freedom of speech, if you give people the freedom to be publicly offensive, then you are impeding the freedom other people have to not be offended/mentally hurt by other people, particularly with intrusive mediums such as radio and television. One person's freedom can lead to another person's impediment. If you disagree with how I've put this, I suggest you look into Thomas Hobbe's Social Contract for a possible explanation of why people need to renounce certain rights in order for others to be allowed theirs and so live in harmony, and why ultimate freedom doesn't work.

I download too, so I agree.

I'm a classical pianist (not famous or anything, and not even full time - quite amateur) and I encourage downloading of what few recordings I have, but that's a bit different than film. I encourage downloading of my music because if I can sell myself, I can exist professionally without records. When I'm done with school I can be a professor, actively concertize, give masterclasses, etc. If people download my music for free, it pays for itself in exposure to new audiences. Giving away my music isn't "free", it's hoping that I'll have a return on an investment of time and energy. A film-maker can't do any of those things, which creates the logical paradox you're stuck in. Films which are paid for are literally the entire point of your craft. I see what you're getting at, and it's one of your more reasonable arguments in the thread, but it's still a paradox in your situation.

Many filmmakers - just like undiscovered musicians, want people to see their work even if it's for free. The internet and downloading has afforded them the ability to be discovered and build a fanbase that has turned into dollars down the line as some people will pay to see their next film. Even some high profile filmmakers have encouraged downloading for various reasons - like they felt they got fucked by the distributor.

Yes people download, but go to any film forum in the world and you will find countless discussions with movie enthusiasts who will not download or if they do, it's only to watch some film they wouldn't buy in the first place. Most film fans have and continue to build their impressive movie collections (which they are proud of) - not consisting of downloads, but offically released DVD's, etc.

I would love to hear your music and maybe even use it in a film or TV series.

You are exceptionally good at ignoring contentions, have you considered politics?

It's good that you're putting in this effort, XenoX, but the Noowatheist cottage industry (whose business models involves suckering people of mediocre intelligence into believing that they're part of an intellectual elite) has flattered its followers with reasurrances that they are "Rationalists" by definition- such that they are left with no further motivation to actually behave or think rationally to secure this honor- and has loosed them on teh intrawebz to spread their gospel. It is a new Manicheanism, really, will the forces of good (science! enlightnment! reason! liberty! yay!) on one side, and the forces of evil (religion, conservatism, cOonNtrROollL) on the other. Scratch a little below the surface and you'll find those feel-good buzzwords "enlightenment" and "reason" are alarmingly absolutist in their connotations-- dangerously absolutist, in my opinion. But you'll never see them examine these terms critically; these are terms that can mean everything they want them to mean by virtue of the fact they mean nothing at all. They have fabricated an historical dialectic of Science vs. Religion, a belief system that says wherever religion has flourished human degradation followed, and that religion is such a universally corrupting force that its eradication would necessarily mean a utopia by default. Don't expect the noowatheist fanboi base to have given a whole lot of thought to what this utopia looks like, though (no, it's not the Netherlands); they're so culturally and historically blinkered that I fully believe they'd be perfectly willing to have us relive every horror of the 20th Century just so they can vindicate their neo-Victorian worldview. You can bring up philosophy, but it's unclear what if any use they have for philosophy. Apparently, all areas of human endeavour have to pair off Thunderdome style and battle to the death, and the natural sciences are expected to emerge victorious over religion. I would imagine a similar fate awaits philosophy, since, you know, all three serve the purpose of, like, explaining shit, and obviously there can only be one way of explaining shit.

But, but, it IS The Netherlands...

You asked me if I approve of or just accept downloading. I answered that I approve of it and do it myself. No ignoring there.

I thought I spelled it out fairly clearly? Go re-read what I said and then ask a pointed question.

Btw, you talking about "old men"? Hate to break this to you, but you're an old man.

At this point, I gotta tell you that I just skim your posts.

40 is the new 30. I have been talking about old men in their 60's and 70's.

Rollin' rollin' rollin' ... keep them doggies rollin'

Yes, I can see where a two or three sentence post would be too much for you to digest. Yeah, this post is so long. I can see where your attention would wander.

I don't like Bill Maher. However, this thread has been on the first page for so long, I figured I had to see what all the fuss was about.

Zero star thread. Would not read again.

OMG, move this to DT already. I came back after many days away and assumed this had moved onto something other than shooting hey man in a barrel. I was wrong. BORING.