yetAnotherUser @ yetAnotherUser @discuss.tchncs.de

Hi!

---

Read more

Posts

2

Comments

614

Joined

1 yr. ago

Ok? Don't quite know how this relates to my comment about legislation behind armed conflict and the definition of "civilian" though. Did you respond to the wrong person?

I do not care about what Hamas is or isn't, nor do I care what Israel says it is or isn't.

Hamas is bound by Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol 1 of the 4th Geneva Conventions:

Article 1:

(4) The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination.

Article 2:

In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

Palestine is generally considered to be under alien occupation and therefore falls under this protocol.

And what is a combatant?

Article 44:

(1) Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.

Article 43:

(2) Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.

And a civilian?

Article 50

(1) A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol. In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian.

(Note: article 4 A goes into more detail as to who can become a POW. Basically anyone who is armed or accompanies the army during conflict.)

From those articles it clearly follows that reservists who are not activated are civilians.

It does not necessarily follow that Hamas is a terrorist organization, nor have I ever claimed it was. The right to armed resistance is still bound by international law such as this protocol.

Attacking reservists who are not activated violates the Geneva Convention and is nearly universally considered - including by Palestine, which has signed the Geneva Convention - to be a war crime.

This includes civilians - which deactivated reservists are - in occupied areas.

Ukraine is similarly not allowed to attack occupying Russians in Crimea who moved there after 2014, despite the fact all male Russians had military service.

Israel uses the exact same argumentation to kill "combat-aged" men - that is to say, male Palestinians who look 14 or older.

Also, being an occupying civilian during a conflict does not allow an opposing party to arrest them. They are afforded various protections, especially by the 4th Geneva Comvention.

That's like the least noteworthy aspect of German anti-piracy action out there tbh.

There's an entire industry around identifying people who torrent and fining them 4 digit amounts as well as forcing them to sign a declaration never to pirate again in their lifetime (which, when broken, results in contractual fines a magnitude larger). Don't want to sign? Tough luck, have fun losing a lawsuit forcing you to sign it.

The cases where large companies do win won't make news though. "Large companies settles with individual" isn't really headline material now, is it?

Also, small companies != people. Neither me nor you are a company and even small companies have significantly more resources available to them than someone who just created the next Lord of the Rings and didn't see a penny.

There are significantly more companies who would rather start killing politicians than see IP law gone. They rake in billions of shareholder value, much moreso than any AI company out there.

I never argued that copyright law is necessarily wrong or bad just because we went millenia without it. What I am arguing is that these laws do not allow people to create intellectual works as people in the past were no less artistic than we are today - maybe even moreso.

Have you seen the impact of IP law on science? It's horrible. No researcher sees any money from their works - rather they must pay to lose their "rights" and have papers published. Scientific journals have hampered scientific progress and will continue to do so for as long as IP law remains. I would not be surprised if millions of needless deaths could have been prevented if only every medical researcher had access to research.

IP law serves solely large companies and independent artists see a couple of breadcrumbs. Abolishing IP law - or at the very least limiting it to a couple of years at most - would have hardly any impact on small artists. The vast, vast, VAST majority of artists make hardly any money already. Just check Bandcamp or itch.io and see how many millions of artists there are who will never ever see success. They do not benefit from IP law - so why should we keep it for the top 0.1% of artists who do?

the chimp would tell the bear

I thought the bear had died?

The rich want to do it because of AI. That's it.

They can already take whatever you create wihout giving you a dime. What are you gonna do, sue a multi-billion dollar company with a fleet of attorneys on standby? With what money?

They would certainly just settle and give you a pittance just about large enough to cover your attorney fees.

Do you know why companies usually don't do this? Because they have sufficiently many people hired who do nothing but create stories for the company full time. They do not need your ideas.

Copyright didn't exist for millenia. It didn't stop authors from writing books.

Is a hot dog stand a restaurant?

It's a business with a kitchen, staff (1 person) and a dining area on occasion (foldable plastic chairs and tables).

Putin shouldn't be quartered. He deserves the boats (with full medical care to ensure he remains alive and conscious for as long as possible).

I don't think pedophile is accurate here.

It's power difference why someone would want to "date" a 16 year old. It allows for very easy abuse which is usually the main motivation. Sexual attraction to children is less likely because far fewer people are pedophiles than abusers.

You are right. And snowing similarly implies that it's cold outside. But you cannot reliably conclude whether it is snowing if you only know it is cold.

It's because of this image:

It went viral on Chinese social media and was quickly censored by the state. As a result, comparing Xi to Winnie the Pooh became a symbol of resistance in China.

For more detail:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Winnie-the-Pooh_in_China

Both the German Federal Constitutional Court and the Federal Court of Justice have applied Radbruch's formula numerous times. Its first court appearances were in cases concerned with National Socialist crimes. The defendants in those cases argued that, according to Nazi statutes valid at the time of their acts, those acts had been legal. The courts used Radbruch's formula to argue that some statutes were so intolerable that they had not been law in the first place and consequently could not be used to justify the acts in question.

This is the current interpretation of the meaning of "law" in Germany. Laws which are entirely unjust must be disobeyed.

Though this is different from an administration ignoring the rule of law. In that case it's fairly obvious that violations of laws can be prosecuted by any following administration.

Not quite. Immigrants intend to stay forever, while expats don't (in my opinion).

That is, if these self-called "expats" do intend to stay forever and obtain citizenship they very much are immigrants who don't want to call themselves immigrants.

Chambers, who has lived in Thailand for years, specializes in studying the influence of the Thai military, which plays a prominent role in the nation's politics.

This is the sole reason for the arrest. Besides, why are you arguing someone who has lived in a country for years is just a guest?

There's no way this is how Rumpelstilzchen is spelled in English...

duckduckgoes

IT IS. English takes every single French word, keeps its spelling but mangles the pronunciation but for Rumpelstilzchen the pronunciation is somehow more relevant than the spelling? It makes some sense, but the ending "stiltskin" is an abomination.

The meaning of "stilzchen" is "small stilt" by the way - so he should've be called "Grumblestilty" in English.

Not quite. Reuploading is at the very least an annoying process.

Uploading anything over Tor is a gruelling process. Downloading takes much time already, uploading even more so. Most consumer internet plans aren't symmetrically either with significantly lower upload than download speeds. Plus, you need to find a direct-download provider which doesn't block Tor exit nodes and where uploading/downloading is free.

Taking something down is quick. A script scraping these forums which automatically reports the download links (any direct-download site quickly removes reports of CSAM by the way - no one wants to host this legal nightmare) can take down thousands of uploads per day.

Making the experience horrible leads to a slow death of those sites. Imagine if 95% of videos on [generic legal porn site] lead to a "Sorry! This content has been taken down." message. How much traffic would the site lose? I'd argue quite a lot.

I'd be surprised if many "producers" are caught. From what I have heard, most uploads on those sites are reuploads because it's magnitudes easier.

Of the 1400 people caught, I'd say maybe 10 were site administors and the rest passive "consumers" who didn't use Tor. I wouldn't put my hopes up too much that anyone who was caught ever committed child abuse themselves.

I mean, 1400 identified out of 1.8 million really isn't a whole lot to begin with.

Yeah, no.

Maybe 20 years ago? But nowadays LEGO has worse quality than nearly any other brand, especially in terms of color consistency.

It doesn't though.

The most effective way to shut these forums down is to register bot accounts scraping links to the clearnet direct-download sites hosting the material and then reporting every single one.

If everything posted to these forums is deleted within a couple of days, their popularity would falter. And victims much prefer having their footage deleted than letting it stay up for years to catch a handful of site admins.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about punishing the people hosting these sites. It's an endless game of cat and mouse and will never be fast enough to meaningfully slow down the spread of CSAM.

Also, these sites don't produce CSAM themselves. They just spread it - most of the CSAM exists already and isn't made specifically for distribution.