Coast Guard orders unvaccinated cadets off campus

[Steam Flyer]

....
Piracy, mates.

So, are you for it, or against it?

 

[Blue Crab]

Copying and distributing someone's work behind a paywall is theft apparently. The Internet is still new tech for most of us but theft is theft. BB meant well but didn't think it through. And he's the MENSA qualified guy! And, as I hopefully pointed out yesterday day RR, brilliant as he is and was in 1994, is not above parsing the truth. So theft and redistribution of bullshit content is a double whammy in my judgement. Trumpian really. Welfare wasn't 3% of the federal budget in 1994. Michelle called bullshit. Correctly in my opinion. Dunno about you but my further reading of RR will be viewed far more critically.

Like to hear Rob's explanation of the phone call because he played right into "Democrats bad!" ... heh heh ... and put it right out there hisself ffs. And more than once. Reich was wrong.

And sure we need some definitions. I'd cut SS out of the notion of being Welfare when it's paid to those of us who put in the work quarters. If and when it goes to folks who didn't pay in, it's Welfare.

 

[Marinatrix447]

If any of those cadets were an offspring of mine, I’d be delighted they didn’t succumb to the coercion.

If the CDC can’t keep its facts straight re: TheScienceTM why should anyone else trust in the adapting narrative of “safe & effective?”

https://www.aier.org/article/which-last-longer-spike-proteins-or-cdc-facts/

Meanwhile those SADSs simply keep coming….?



https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/heres-how-the-vaccine-is-causing

Since the lockdowns we’ve slipped into a world where logic is an enemy and truth’s become a censurable menace.

https://aaronkheriaty.substack.com/p/our-lawsuit-uncovers-army-of-federal

No off you pop [literally] go get those magic bullet mRNA BOOOOSTERS!

 

[Blue Crab]

Cheers!

 

[MR.CLEAN]

William D. Richards Yes, it is. You are essentially republishing it. Fair Use Doctrine does allow you to copy a line or two if it is relevant to your review of the article, but not the whole thing.
There are people who have tried this very action to get around a copyright and post a written work for free, claiming they were ‘reviewing’ the piece in question. They have lost badly in court. So, it is best to not to do this.

Let me give you some translation hints for an expert peddling legal bullshit:

Anytime an expert says something is "essentially" something, replace the word 'essentially' with 'not really' for accuracy. "You are essentially republishing it" should read "You are not really republishing it."

Anytime an expert says 'there are people who have..." something, replace the word "are" with "must be". "There must be people who have tried this very action..."

What he should have written is something like:

"the interplay between the Fair Use Doctrine and Section 230 of the CDMA means that forum site operators can almost never be successfully sued for the existence of User-Generated Content (UGC) infringing a copyright on a forum, unless they ignore properly submitted DMCA takedown notices for the UGC or have specifically encouraged the posting of infringing material. Negligence does not suffice. A copyright holder suing an individual forum member posting infringing content is severely limited by the Copyright Act in damages they can recoverr unless there is evidence that the infringer was 'willful', which is nearly impossible to prove with regard to a person who is not somehow financially profiting off the posting. On the other hand, a paid forum contributor or someone who uses their forum personality to otherwise operate commercially - like an influencer or podcaster - could very easily see serious financial liability for posting the protected work of others with no Fair Use or other justification. Because of the extensive effort and expense required to bring a successful infringement action under the Copyright Act and many years of evidence that large-scale actions (remember Napster?) fail to provide any deterrent effect while creating PR nightmares, few IP owners choose to police non-commercial uses, focusing instead on pursuing violators with a commercial connection to the infringement and/or deep pockets."

 

[Steam Flyer]

... No off you pop [literally] go get those magic bullet mRNA BOOOOSTERS!

Is it just me, or does it seem kooky to anybody else, that the RWNJ anti-vaxxoes always go to some basement studio and talk to bloggers or some other self-proclaimed expert, instead of going to hospitals and talking to doctors, or to universities and talking to scientists, to find THE TRUTH!! about medical science?

 

[Blue Crab]

Let me give you some translation hints for an expert peddling legal bullshit:

Anytime an expert says something is "essentially" something, replace the word 'essentially' with 'not really' for accuracy. "You are essentially republishing it" should read "You are not really republishing it."

Anytime an expert says 'there are people who have..." something, replace the word "are" with "must be". "There must be people who have tried this very action..."

What he should have written is something like:

"the interplay between the Fair Use Doctrine and Section 230 of the CDMA means that forum site operators can almost never be successfully sued for the existence of User-Generated Content (UGC) infringing a copyright on a forum, unless they ignore properly submitted DMCA takedown notices for the UGC or have specifically encouraged the posting of infringing material. Negligence does not suffice. A copyright holder suing an individual forum member posting infringing content is severely limited by the Copyright Act in damages they can recoverr unless there is evidence that the infringer was 'willful', which is nearly impossible to prove with regard to a person who is not somehow financially profiting off the posting. On the other hand, a paid forum contributor or someone who uses their forum personality to otherwise operate commercially - like an influencer or podcaster - could very easily see serious financial liability for posting the protected work of others with no Fair Use or other justification. Because of the extensive effort and expense required to bring a successful infringement action under the Copyright Act and many years of evidence that large-scale actions (remember Napster?) fail to provide any deterrent effect while creating PR nightmares, few IP owners choose to police non-commercial uses, focusing instead on pursuing violators with a commercial connection to the infringement and/or deep pockets."

Yeah I get all that. I know BB is doing some a favor by the copy-paste. Nothing commercial about it. my post above was from Average Joes, and Joes feel it's not ok when there's a paywall. Who cares whether mumbo jumbo proves up? Not me, but I am certain, not essentially but real certain, that "content providers" as writers are now called, want to be paid for their work. That's what this issue is about. Copying and pasting entire riffs to work around a paywall ain't OK. Attribution or not. I don't care how they do it in Vermont or CT.

I'm not after Billy, either, although he did go against my advice to buy a real bicycle and got an e-bike for exercise.

Heh.

 

[Marinatrix447]

THE TRUTH!! about medical science…PMSL

(a. Something bad is happening that becomes blatantly obvious

(b. A small minority of people point out that the “thing” is blatantly obvious

(c. These people are bullied, attacked, accused of killing Grandma, ridiculed and cancelled then “time passes”

(d. The “experts” concede the blatantly obvious thing was correct

(e. No apologies

 

[Steam Flyer]

THE TRUTH!! about medical science…PMSL

(a. Something bad is happening that becomes blatantly obvious

(b. A small minority of people point out that the “thing” is blatantly obvious

(c. These people are bullied, attacked, accused of killing Grandma, ridiculed and cancelled then “time passes”

(d. The “experts” concede the blatantly obvious thing was correct

(e. No apologies

OK, let's take this one thing at a time.
You know, the scientific way.

A- what is this "thing" that you consider blatantly obvious?

 

[Blue Crab]

Kool-Ail isn't good without sugar for $500, Alex

 

[d'ranger]

All true freedom loving people know doing your own research is the only way. Believing in educated experts is the start of the slippery slope to being brainwashed. Vaccines were created by the devil! RESIST LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT. Need more proof? Everybody admitted to a hospital is sick and/or injured!!!! Coincidence or Conspiracy? You decide.

The above is purple for those still confused.

 

[Keith]

ahhh, the anti-vaxers are out in force.

 

[Bump-n-Grind]

And you like that to apply to the whole population wouldn't you?

a bit of a stretch to infer that from his comments.

 

[Foredeck Shuffle]

Then I will request anything I want to post, directly from the authors. That should satisfy your concerns.

 

[Monkey]

7 dumbasses we don't need in the service.

I’d hate to be out on the water, in trouble, only to find out the Coasties are shorthanded because of Covid politics. Those seven dumbasses volunteered to risk their lives when someone like you or me get in trouble. There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics. If you’re so much better, volunteer to replace one of them.

 

[Blue Crab]

There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics

Here's where ya went off the tracks.

 

[Raz'r]

I’d hate to be out on the water, in trouble, only to find out the Coasties are shorthanded because of Covid politics. Those seven dumbasses volunteered to risk their lives when someone like you or me get in trouble. There is absolutely no reason those 7 couldn’t have served on a shore based detail other than politics. If you’re so much better, volunteer to replace one of them.

7 service people who can’t follow orders? Yeah, I can see why the commanders don’t want them.

 

[Monkey]

Here's where ya went off the tracks.

Nonsense. There’s a massive portion of the Coast Guard who operate from shore bases. I can totally understand the vax rules for ship based personnel.

 

[Blue Crab]

Game, Set, Point. Thanks for playing.

 

[accnick]

Nonsense. There’s a massive portion of the Coast Guard who operate from shore bases. I can totally understand the vax rules for ship based personnel.

You’ve never been in the military, have you? These are first year cadets, at the academy in dorms. They have no idea what their ultimate assignment might be at this stage in their careers, but right now, they are college students, on campus, and often aboard ship as part of their duties.

The Defense Department makes the rules for the service academies (even though USCG is now part of Homeland Security), and the rules apply to all service members, from day one of their enlistment.

You don’t get to pass on one rule or requirement because you disagree with it. If you want to choose which orders or directives you want to follow, the military isn’t for you.

Better to weed out those types early.

There is no shortage of men and women who want to go to a service academy, and are willing to follow the rules.