Our News Team @ 11 with host Snot Flickerman


Yes, I can hear you, Clem Fandango!

  • 69 Posts
  • 1.97K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 24th, 2023

help-circle



  • The last time I even remember private trackers being taken down was in the days of Oink.UK and What.CD.

    Oink was shut down in 2007 and What was shut down in 2016, both mostly because they had grown so big they were hard to ignore. A lot of modern sites keep an upper limit on the accounts they allow to prevent too much growth and attracting attention.

    Hell, I remember baconBits having an upper limit of less than 10,000 accounts. Once that limit was reached, you couldn’t even send out invites.

    Also, public trackers that were huge like RARBG survived until finances shut them down, via COVID and the war in Ukraine, they were never taken down forcibly, and they were massive and widely used.






  • Just fuckin with ya. Those are all valid gripes. I guess I got in on the scene way early through invites from friends and so I’ve hardly ever had to go through any interview process. I think the only place I “interviewed” was baconbits and it wasn’t really an interview since I mostly just shared evidence of good ratio on other trackers with long-lived accounts. I’ve had an account in good standing on Cinemageddon for… 18 years as of next month. Getting over that initial hump made it pretty easy to get in with good standing, and most decent trackers aren’t that hard to get good ratio on.






  • Let’s be absolutely clear here: The explosion of people being comfortable coming out as some stripe of LGBTQ+ has everything to do with an open internet where youth were not restricted from finding out about information related to how they felt inside. Instead of being made to feel like strangers in their own skin, with a world telling them that people like them didn’t or shouldn’t exist, they instead found community and self-love through internet forums and information which allowed them to pursue full, healthy lives as adults.

    This “protect the children” malarkey is one more way for the religious groups who oppose LGBTQ+ culture to “protect the children” by restricting access to this kind of information, reducing their ability to find it in their formative years, in the name of protecting them while actually stunting their personal growth.

    It extends beyond sexuality as well, although that is the most obvious since many religions are deeply censorious regarding sex.

    It also affects subjects like atheism, as the various religious cultures generally do not want people contemplating the idea that there isn’t a god, especially not while they’re young, they want you long indoctrinated into belief before you can explore different ideas.

    Further, when I was a kid in the 80s and 90s, everything I knew about drugs was literally old wives tales meant to scare kids away from drugs, and then the internet came around and suddenly there was a boom of actual, verifiable scientific information about drugs so if you wanted to experiment with drugs, you knew what you were getting into. I once had a conversation with a girlfriend who was a bit older than me about her experiences with LSD as a teen, and she admitted that at the time she really didn’t understand on any scientific level what was happening or what the nature of hallucination was, she just knew she was having fun and seeing crazy shit.

    This is a backdoor to restricting access to important information that youth need to have access to for making healthy decisions for themselves sexually, religiously, and in terms of what substances they put in their bodies.

    The birth of the internet gave us a beautiful period where people could grow up with access to accurate, verifiable, worthwhile information that helped them navigate and understand the world they were growing up in and who they were within that world.

    This kind of legislation intends to snuff out that openness and accessibility which led to increased openness and acceptance of LGBTQ+, atheism, and safe drug use (including the understanding that some illegal drugs like marijuana and LSD are probably safer than legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco).



  • Oh I guess those guys from the Pirate Bay are in the clear and we can undo their prison sentences then!


    1. Copyright should be a much shorter, more reasonable length, and then this whole issue would be a moot point because there would more than enough in the public domain for the corporations to train their AI while also not restricting access to individuals and open source projects to do the same.

    2. The real issue at hand is that corporations like Facebook have literally billions at their disposal to fight this in court. The Pirate Bay admins did not, despite being charged with profiting wildly off their media sharing site. Facebook has arguably made so much more off of their AI offerings than the admins of the tiny Pirate Bay team could have dreamed of. For fucks sake Peter Sunde’s username was “brokep” which I always assumed stood for “Broke Peter” as in “Peter has no money.”

    3. We have yet to see if the courts in the USA will make this a hypocritical outcome where small players like the Pirate Bay who legitimately did not make that much money went to prison, Aaron Schwartz was threatened with life in prison and committed suicide, but somehow it will be okay for giant corporations to do because they made so much money doing it. It’s definitely possible, America feels like a country where as long as you do the crime big enough, it stops being treated as a crime and instead people pat you on the back and reward for criming so hard you broke the justice system and instead it just gets labeled “good business sense.”


  • It sounds like, essentially what you’re saying, I think. That if your mother lied or omitted information that would have led to a denial of her citizenship approval, and this is later discovered she will have her citizenship revoked, and you would also lose citizenship. Essentially because it would be considered that she committed fraud to obtain citizenship, and you by extension would be a benefactor of her fraud even if you were unaware of it.

    However,it also sounds like if her citizenship is revoked for other reasons not involving fraudulent statements and covering up a past that would have barred her from citizenship, you will keep your citizenship providing you are in the US when hers is revoked.

    That’s my very rough reading of it, and yeah, it’s a bunch of fucking legalese. It’s honestly frustrating that laws like this don’t have a “simple english wikipedia” equivalent to explain it to non-lawyers.

    Also… it should be noted that laws seemingly mean nothing with respect to the current US regime and how they manage citizenship revocation.