tiphareth: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system

Настроение:	bleach
Музыка:	Manager - Anarkhiya

Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system
РЖ таки не напечатал про копирайты

http://imperium.lenin.ru/LENIN/32/C/

Можно было бы и с самого начала догадаться,
что так будет, но все равно обидно.
Суки, я месяц не разгибаясь мудохался.

Стоило бы, конечно, обьявить врагам России бойкот, но
что им от моего бойкота, ни тепло ни холодно. Плюнуть
и растереть.

Вулис был умный человек, он когда о ком-то некрасивом писал
всегда добавлял тьфу. Получалось упоительно

From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Subject: Re: Hate speech and censorship
Date: 1997/12/22
Comments: All power to the ZOG!

Anonymous <nobody@replay.com> writes:

>On behalf of the non-racist cypherpunks, please accept an apology for
>Paul Bradley's racist message:

>>uneducated and foolish arabs such as Parekh should stick
>>to what they do best: running kebab shops and/or selling cheap fake rolex
>>watches to tourists.

Politically correct shit like this reveals the stupidity and the ignorance of
its writer. no wonder he hides behind an anonymous remailer, afraid to sign
his own name on such crap. However his writing style is unmistakable that of
the cowardly liar Sandy "moderator" Sandfart (spit) from C2net (a boot-licking
employee of the smelly Arab crypto-snake-oil peddler Sameer Parekh (spit)).

ObHateSpeech: Kill all faggots and/or politicians.

Smelly Arab crypto-snake-oil peddler. И никак иначе.

Убивать всех пидорасов и политических деятелей.

Отправляйтесь продавать шаурму, ага?

Враги России (тьфу) это враги
России (тьфу), иметь с ними какие-либо
дела глупо, обманут. В большой
многострадальной стране носятся блохи
с козлами в вышине, кони пляшут и
звери поют, нам Иванам проходу не дают.

* * *

Быть мертвым - не значит умереть.
Манагер гений, без пизды.

Сейчас сяду обложку составлять на Армию Власова
и Анархию. Считайте меня коммунистом, да?
Ничего лучше не бывает, ага.

Мертвые стены распяли взгляд
Расплющенный голос ползет навзрыд
Сердобольный шепот, сквозь шкодливый шаг,
Я здесь не могу, верните назад
Оскорбленные взглядом в турникетах свобод
Пихают водку в хрустальный шлейф
Истыканный ревностью старый холст
В изъеденный нежностью скомканный жест

Когда же, когда придет смерть

Я пришел подарить черви в руках
Он тихо взял, я гордо ушел
Я хотел говорить только те слова
Слова мертвы, у меня лишь слова
Шекспировский слог, пушкинский стих
Как костыль перестройки в урловскую топь
Но ведь есть еще, как это грустно звучит
Когда я говорю, когда он молчит

Когда же, когда придет смерть

Миллионы наград, миллионы вершин
Миллионы триумфов, миллионы побед
Миллион раз ты, миллион раз я
Миллион раз он, миллион раз они
Миллионы не ждут, миллионы не лгут,
Миллионы не топчут, миллионы идут
Миллионы
Миллионы
Миллионы
Миллионы

Когда же, когда придет смерть

Привет
Миша.

(Добавить комментарий)

	kirill@lj 2002-03-05 22:01 (ссылка)
	???????? ???? ???? - ?????? ? ??. ??? ?? ?????? ?????????. ? ???????. (Ответить) (Ветвь дискуссии)

	ex_tipharet@lj 2002-03-06 04:18 (ссылка)
	>???????? ???? ???? - ?????? >? ??. ??? ?? ?????? ?????????. ? ???????. ? ?????? ?????, ??? ??????????? ????. ?? ???? ???? ?? ???, ? r_l@lj. ? ???? ? ? ????? ???????? ??????? ????? ????????????? ?????????? ?????????? ????? (??). ????? ???? ????. (Ответить) (Уровень выше)

	angerona@lj 2002-03-06 00:57 (ссылка)
	I haven't a time to read the whole thing right now, but first things first: I wouldn't recommend starting anything with quotations by rms. A label of "flaming" is guaranteed to anything even remotely touching rms or his name (better touch his name in any case, touching him physically is rather dangerous). (Ответить) (Ветвь дискуссии)

	ex_tipharet@lj 2002-03-06 04:19 (ссылка)
	The whole book is a flame, basically. Misha. (Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

angerona@lj
2002-03-06 06:12 (ссылка)

Do you mind if I stick with English for now? I type much faster this way, and at the moment I should be working instead of reading LJ, but that's an aside.

So I read your opus. Long. Excellent use of quotations and terminology, although I'd never suspect that "Chomsky" would be transliterated as "Homski". I think you need a "ch" there.

What I agree with: american copyright, as it exists now, is purely a work of large corporate lobbies; it has nothing to do with any of the reasons that might be sited for the existence of copyright.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

angerona@lj
2002-03-06 06:13 (ссылка)

What I don't agree with: your (?) characterization of two cultures of geeks and spooks. If it really were as you say, things would be much simpler. The problem is that geeks are very much not a mainstream culture -- they are viewed as outcasts (starting from the term "geek" which is not exactly favorable), and their liberalism and technical expertise are viewed with suspicion, roughly as their financial success (in case of yuppies) or questionable (that's not my terminology, mind you) sexual/moral values (in case of rms and most of the Berkeley/MIT/FSF population associated with those political drives).

America in large remains puritan and suspicious of what it doesn't understand. In addition to everything else, they can now use "patriotism" to cover up for their side. All that doesn't bode well for geeks. In a way, spooks are winning. Or, if not spooks, headless grey masses, located in small square states. I do wonder if Lessig, rms et al. would be more accepted politically if they could be more acceptable socially (Lessig, despite his very innovative legal views, is not a pleasant person in person; and rms is not exactly the person you want to be talking to at a party)?

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

angerona@lj
2002-03-06 06:13 (ссылка)

And, of course, you forgot to mention extra-territorial attempts at avoiding US copyright an dother laws, such as Richard Lackey's "independent country" of Sealand, featured in that same Wired. By acquiring rights to house themselves on an off-shore platform in England, they declared themselves to be a different countries (and issued passports) and are trying to be in business of providing hosting/storage for all sorts of material that should not be easily accessed by third entities.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

ex_tipharet@lj
2002-03-06 11:23 (ссылка)

>"independent country" of Sealand...

This is basically a realization of Sterling/Hakim Bey/Burroughs
dream of pirate utopia in cyberspace. It will be crushed as soon as the
powers that be decide that it does not serve the useful purpose
of distracting people from the goals at hand.

As soon as SCCCA and DRM is enforced, no illicit
computer activity will be possible, far and wide.

All the best
Misha.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)

ex_tipharet@lj
2002-03-06 11:17 (ссылка)

Well, what you noticed is the difference between
the people of culture (which are few) and the commonplace folks,
who don't care about anything much except cars, sports and beer.

In Russia, the worldview and the media are
almost totally controlled by a couple
of ideologies (monetarism and liberal values),
which are universally despised among the people.

In U.S. at the time of dotcom boom, the worldview
of the populace was controlled by the dotcom geeks,
who were, well, also despised (not as much, though).

This situation is universal.

>I do wonder if Lessig, rms et al. would be more accepted politically if they
> could be more acceptable socially

They _are_ accepted politically. Before he
became a vice-president, Al Gore was a high profile ecology activist;
I knew people in Russian ecological movement who knew him
him on firstname basis. Quite a geek.

This support is bipartisan, by the way: Newt Gingrich
was a sci-fi writer before he became a Speaker
of Congress.

All the best
Misha.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

angerona@lj
2002-03-06 13:18 (ссылка)

But the problem is that they aren't supported socially. Al Gore's biggest problem wasn't his political views, but that he was considered to be "geeky" and "boring" by the general public, who preferred to see someone like "them" and so elected the dolt we have now. But that's an aside.

I didn't know about Newt Gingrich -- that's interesting.

There is a large step between rms and Gore. One is an outcast even among emacs-loving geeks; the other.. well, I can't quite characterize it. The problem with rms is that he is really much better at coding than he is at speaking or writing.

Btw, I write in English because it's more convenient for me. You can feel free to respond in any language you prefer -- my Russian is not atrophied, my skills of typing in Russian are.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

ex_tipharet@lj
2002-03-06 14:15 (ссылка)

Regarding RMS, at MIT/Harvard he's
quite popular (I witness), at slashdot.org
he is also quite popular. In England he's
very popular too. He might be unpopular
with small (but vociferous) minority
of dotcom nuovo riches, laissez-faire
fanatics and fans of Eric S. Raymond,
but overall he's much more charismatic
than any of his opponents. His writing
is also superb (especially comparing with
Larry Wall, Eric S. Raymond and other
luminaries).

Stallman's sanitary habits are not to everybody's
taste, but a prophet is obliged to keep himself unkempt
and unwashed.

All the best
Misha.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

angerona@lj
2002-03-06 14:31 (ссылка)

It's actually surprising, but neither him, nor Chomsky have much following at MIT. Both are regarded as people who have contributed significantly in their respective fields, but quite too involved in flaming.

I have a fairly unfavorable opinion of Eric Raymond, and have never thought of Larry Wall in connection with anything other than Perl.

An Stallman's keeping himself unwashed and unkempt wouldn't be quite so bad if he didn't insist on trying to get laid all the same :). Being a female, it's somewhat of an experience to meet him. At MIT he is most famous for his theory of interacting with women (well, besides Emacs and gnu, of course): if you ask a 100 women "would you sleep with me?" without any introduction, chances are that at least one will say "yes" and that right there is a success. But we are straying from the topic.

It's quite novel (for me) to see this kind of flaming in Russian. I believe this was also a first time I saw Emacs being mentioned in a Russian text. Now if we could only have M-x-write-my-livejournal-post....

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)

	fyysik@lj 2002-03-07 12:23 (ссылка)
	BS, ????. ??? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ?????????? ????? ??????. ??? ?? ?? ???? ????????? ??????? ??????? ???????, ? ????? ?????????? ???? ?? ??? ? ????? (Ответить) (Уровень выше) (Ветвь дискуссии)

	ex_tipharet@lj 2002-03-08 19:40 (ссылка)
	?? ?????????? ????-????? ? ????? ???????, ?????????? ? ?????? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ????????????. ????? ????, ??????? ???????????????? ???? ???????-??????????? ??? ???????, ???????????????? ????? ??????? ??? ??????, ? ????????. ????? ???? ????. (Ответить) (Уровень выше)

avva@lj
2002-03-06 06:26 (ссылка)

Chomsky's father was ???????, spelled Chomsky in English; Chomsky switched to the ch- pronuncitation intentionally. However, there's a well-established history of spelling his name ??????? in Russian, reaching all the way back to dicussions about his linguistic theories in the 60ies and 70ies.

What I agree with: american copyright, as it exists now, is purely a work of large corporate lobbies; it has nothing to do with any of the reasons that might be sited for the existence of copyright.

Of course it has everything to do with those reasons; it just twists them in unreasonable ways.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)

	fyysik@lj 2002-03-07 12:17 (ссылка)
	This is 100% russian literary tradition - to write ???????, not ??????. (Ответить) (Уровень выше)

	syarzhuk@lj 2002-03-06 05:39 (ссылка)
	>????? ??? ????? ???????, ?? ????? ? ???-?? ?????????? ????? ?????? ???????? ????. ? ??? ????? ????? ? ?????? "???"? (Ответить) (Ветвь дискуссии)

	serg_a@lj 2002-03-06 06:49 (ссылка)
	http://www.imperium.lenin.ru/EOWN/eown7/pro-vulis/ (Ответить) (Уровень выше)

	ipain@lj 2002-03-06 08:53 (ссылка)
	? ???????? ???? 20 ?????????????? ? ???????????. ?? ??????? ???-??. ?? ??????. ???????? ????????? ????????, ???? ?? ???????? ? ??????? ??? ??????, ?? ?? ? ?? ?????. (Ответить) (Ветвь дискуссии)

	????????? qub@lj 2002-03-09 00:09 (ссылка)
	?????? ?????????????? ????, ? ??? ??? ???????? ?????????. ?? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???????????? (Ответить) (Уровень выше)

kakieto levye telki tupovatye.. kto eto?

zagonchik@lj
2002-03-07 15:05 (ссылка)

???? ?? ????? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ????????

? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ????? ? ??? ??? ???????

??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? -
???? ?? ?????? ?? ????, -

???????? ? ???? ?????? ?? ? ????????? ??? ? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ? ???? ??????

? ???? ????????? ??????? ??????????? ????? ??????? ? spookies ?? ????? ??????

????? ??????? ???????, ?? ??? ??? ?????? ? ??????, ?? ?????? ?????????, ?? ? ??????? ? ??? ????? ?????.

? ??? ??? ????? ? ?????????????????

????? ?????? ???????!

??? ? ?????? ???? ??? ?????? ???????- ??? ????? ??? ????????? ?? ?????? ?? ?????

(Ответить)

????????? ???????? ? ????, ?????, ?? ???? ???? ?? 3-4 ????????? ? ??????????? ?????????? ?????? -

zagonchik@lj
2002-03-07 15:14 (ссылка)

?? ????? ??? ???

??????? ? ?????? ????, ??? ????? ?????? ???????? ?? ??? ? ????? ???????. ? ????? ???????.
??? ??? ? ???? ???? ????? ??????????? ? ?????????????? ?? ???????? ??????.
? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???????
Interests:
bulgakov, epee, fencing, glass, harry potter, intellectual property,
kharkiv, kharkov, law, law school, mit, musicals, patents, pelevin,
privacy, russian literature, sondheim, stoppard, ukraine, ??????????,
??????? ??????????, ???????, ???????

(Ответить)