photography documentaries

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by sobriquet, Jun 19, 2010.

  1. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    It's not up to individual humans to judge humanity, but humans are
    obviously fallible and
    you can only really hold them accountable to the degree that they are
    aware of themselves
    and their environment, which allows them to realize what options they
    have regarding their
    behavior and their respective consequences.
    So raising the general level of education and the availability of
    information in order to
    ensure most individuals become independent critical minds who think
    for themselves and don't allow
    themselves to be deluded by some misguided criminal leader, like
    hitler or stalin, will generally
    lead towards a society where people enjoy maximal freedom and
    opportunities to enjoy a life free
    from arbitrary oppression from others.

    Information is an ally in that struggle. Suppose you found a formula
    that allows you to compute reality in a similar
    fashion as the mandelbrot fractal, where you can zoom in to inspect
    reality on particular coordinates in time and space,
    allowing you to observe reality as a disembodied eye to witness any
    event in past, present and future.
    If you were to share this information with others, everybody would be
    in a position to objectively witness any crime
    and identify the culprits and this would surely enable us to ensure
    criminals could never avoid their punishment as
    their crimes could never go unnoticed or remain undetected.
    I think such an invention would increase the fairness of life, kind of
    similar to the naive idea of a superhuman power
    who is omniscient and who will judge people in the afterlife, except
    it's more realistic if you can hold people accountable
    for their actions during their lifetime.
    Nothing is too strong in my opinion. If you just have a mobile phone
    camera, that
    kind of limits your options regarding your choices as a photographer
    (e.g. the choice of aperture or
    the choice of focal distance you would normally have with a zoom lens)
    and you would not be able
    to exploit as wide a range of photographic opportunities that you
    could if you had a camera
    with more settings to adjust and higher quality of the final image.
    If others in the past would have thought along similar lines, the
    chances are good you wouldn't
    even have the wonderful opportunity to take pictures in the first

    So it's kind of strange to be in a position where you enjoy a lot of
    freedom and opportunities thanks
    to the people in the past who have shared their ideas and knowledge
    with others for the benefit
    of humanity that you end up with the results of all this collective
    cultural wealth and subsequently
    you enjoy it but refuse to contribute anything yourself for the
    benefit of people who would
    like to enjoy it likewise in the future.

    Also, try to take the perspective of an idea. Some ideas are bound to
    be developed as related ideas gradually
    come into existence and leaving an ever more conspicuous gap that some
    idea is bound to fill up sooner or later.
    So people like Einstein might simply have been the right person at the
    right time who were able to pick up on
    an important idea like relativity, but it's unlikely the idea of
    relativity would never have been proposed if
    Einstein hadn't come along. So from the perspective of the idea of
    relativity, it would be more or less irrelevant
    if Einstein had decided it would be better he would have kept his idea
    of relativity to himself and take it
    to his grave, because the idea was inevitably going to be realized and
    disclosed by someone else in that case.

    In a way the development of ideas by humanity is a kind of brute force
    approach, by having a lot of humans
    who have a lot of time to come up with ideas and that way specific
    ideas don't really rely on particular individuals
    for their development.
    But isn't this the essential power of information technology, given
    that information is a resource
    that isn't scarce and hence can benefit everybody, unlikely limited
    resources such as food or energy?
    If there is anything that is quite depressing about the modern state
    of affairs, it's the fact that
    wealth is still so unfairly distributed over the world and one way to
    amend that situation would
    be to share information freely, which would benefit poor people in
    particular, because information and
    education is most likely the key towards improving their poor economic
    But what is the value of information if you keep it to yourself
    instead of sharing it with others?
    You would probably only be limiting your own opportunities that way
    and it would be rather inconsequential
    as ideas don't rely on individuals but on the collective effort to
    share ideas.
    Isn't the fact that you're able to enjoy the wealth of human culture,
    for instance at the local public library,
    a powerful motivation for people to be inspired by the ideas of others
    and feel an urge to try and contribute
    some original ideas to the shared collective property of human ideas
    in order to make some kind of impact
    on future developments?
    Either you will be forgotten as an anonymous nobody or people might
    remember you as the person who has contributed
    some noteworthy idea or creation that might inspire countless others
    sobriquet, Jun 24, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  2. sobriquet

    Pete Guest

    The form of the notice is important. If Barney adds the notice (c) B
    Rubble it informs the reader that Barney hasn't bothered to take the
    first step in protecting his work and it's very unlikely that Barney
    will be able to defend his rights.
    The right-click disabling is frequently performed via javascript,
    making the feature useless. Any image that can be viewed can also be
    saved. It's probably been saved automatically in the browser cache (not
    all browsers honour the no-cache meta tags, when present).
    Pete, Jun 24, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  3. sobriquet

    Pete Guest

    I fail to see the contradiction because (c) is not a recognized symbol
    and Barney did not put a date on his notice.
    Pete, Jun 24, 2010
  4. sobriquet

    tony cooper Guest

    You have an odd view of what "sharing" is. I post links of my
    photographs to this newsgroup. I'm quite willing for you to share by
    viewing that photo.

    What you seem to want to be able to do, though, is to download that
    photograph, keep it in file, use it any which way you please, and
    treat it as if it's your own. That, to me, is not sharing. It's

    ("Conversion", in US law, is the unlawful appropriation of someone
    else's property. It's different from "theft" in that theft requires
    an action by one party to take away another party's property.)
    tony cooper, Jun 24, 2010
  5. sobriquet

    whisky-dave Guest

    So how do you manage that then.
    I';ve seen anything from van goth to rolf harris on the internet.
    How would van goth keep his pictures of the internet considering he wasn;t
    alive when they were put on it.

    Yep, true but we aren't talking aboput peolpe that do that.
    I haven;t seen any software vender just throw their software out on the

    I've seen BP empty millions of barrels of oil in to the gulf but no ones
    rushing to take it home.

    What if someone comes in to your home and takes your photos.

    They would if they thought they were worth anything, have you ever been
    broken in to ?
    whisky-dave, Jun 24, 2010
  6. sobriquet

    whisky-dave Guest

    define decent size ?
    Do you really need to print out you pictures at 20"X30"
    what is the smallest physical size print you would accept and what
    resolution would that be.

    That's their problem not mine.

    No not really if you do it reasonably it's OK.
    Youb don't seem to provide very high quality images on your flickr site.

    I'm interest in astro photography but I don;t want or need images of 1GB in
    size, you don;t actually need such a size for desktop pictures and
    screensavers, you do know that don't you.
    Do you also have any idea why some post thumb size pictures on the internet

    True , and that's why we need copyright to protect those willing to share
    but not being ripped off.
    There's nothing wrong with that share what you want, it's when things get
    shared without permission is when the problems arise.
    So do those that produce the documentaries wish for you to share their work
    Have you ever thought that they might require payment for their work.
    If someone told you to go and take 1000s photos would you do it for free ?

    Or that just might be totally clueless as to the economics of the world.
    Even the human rights people get paid for producing stuff.
    You do know that people are actually employed to maintain their site on the
    internet why don;t you copy their site and maintain it on your own server ?
    whisky-dave, Jun 24, 2010
  7. sobriquet

    whisky-dave Guest

    Actually you proved he was over-flowing with shit,
    full of shit just doesn;t do him justice. :)
    whisky-dave, Jun 24, 2010
  8. sobriquet

    Peter Guest

    Aparantly you have been involved in drafting protection agreements and
    litigation more than I.
    BTW your citaton is not mandatory law and if you read it carefully, you will
    see what it says. Since you obviously have so much knowledge, I doubt that I
    can contribute anything further to help you.

    I know that. The purpose for right click disabled is: that is a reasonable
    step to protect your work.
    Peter, Jun 24, 2010
  9. Could you, GK, and Ray (no) knock it off? I am sure sobriquet cannot,
    but you can.
    John McWilliams, Jun 24, 2010
  10. sobriquet

    Pete Guest

    Is this the five minute argument or the full half hour?
    Pete, Jun 24, 2010
  11. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    If they are not alive, they can't object to their creations being
    shared anyway.
    There software is freely available on p2p networks anyway, so if they
    had wanted
    their software to remain in their possession, they shouldn't have
    published their software, because that way it inevitably ends up on
    p2p networks.
    Well.. owning physical property is a human right and I'm an advocate
    of human rights.
    So if people break into my house, I can go to the police and report
    the crime and hopefully they are willing to help and find the
    If they break into my house, I don't care that much if they take my
    pictures or other digital content, because I have several copies in
    several locations. So it's unlikely they will break into all places
    and take all copies.
    sobriquet, Jun 24, 2010
  12. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    What does it matter.. any copyright claim is completely irrelevant
    A copyright claim is not going to stop anyone from sharing your work
    on p2p.

    So you might as well claim that you're the ruler of the universe and
    it would be equally inconsequential as people will ignore such
    spurious claims anyway.
    sobriquet, Jun 24, 2010
  13. sobriquet

    Ray Fischer Guest

    No kidding? You're also a sleazy liar and bereft of any morals.
    Ray Fischer, Jun 25, 2010
  14. sobriquet

    Ray Fischer Guest

    You really lost the argument when you starting blatantly lying about
    what people write. You have no credibility and no morals. You're
    just a slimy thief.
    Ray Fischer, Jun 25, 2010
  15. sobriquet

    Ray Fischer Guest

    And if you don't want your wallet stolen then don't carry it with you.
    Don't want your car stolen? Don't leave it where a thief can get at it.
    The thief always finds rationalizations for its crimes.
    Ray Fischer, Jun 25, 2010
  16. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    You're also a child molester and a war criminal.

    Kind of pathetic to hear a hypocrite nazi cockroach like you talking
    about morals.
    sobriquet, Jun 25, 2010
  17. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    Maybe you should pull your head from your arse Ray, otherwise
    it's hard to make out what you're saying from the mumbling noises
    coming out of your arse.
    sobriquet, Jun 25, 2010
  18. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    No, more like: If you don't want others to take your money, then don't
    deliberately scatter
    your money out on the streets wherever you go.
    If you don't want your car stolen, don't leave it out in a busy spot
    with the door open and the keys in the lock and expecting it will
    still be there
    if you check on it after a few years.
    The nazi cockroach always has his head stuck up his arse.

    Here is a bitstring for you to take away Ray: 000101011100.
    Show me how that bitstring can be taken away (much less stolen),
    because that's a myth you keep perpetuating.

    I'm sure you will be unsuccessful in your feeble attempt to remove
    that bitstring from the archives, which demonstrates
    that bitstrings can't be taken away usually.

    People like me, who share bitstrings on p2p networks, never take them
    away, so there is no theft involved whatsoever.
    sobriquet, Jun 25, 2010
  19. sobriquet

    Ray Fischer Guest

    There's a fine example of the morality of the lunatic thief.
    Ray Fischer, Jun 26, 2010
  20. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    On 26 jun, 09:50, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
    [.. babbling ..]

    Ray Fischer the nazi cockroach just won't shut up and crawl back under
    his rock.
    sobriquet, Jun 26, 2010
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.