In today's news...

[Changer]

Re: In today's news...

Hoh. I thought these forums where about pron, and not about yet another bunch of people misinformed about genetic modification. It's really not that scary. We have decades of research. Sure we should keep it up, but.. out of many, many studies not a single one has proven any risks.

unless you are a mosquito, I wouldn't worry about gene technology messing with mosquitos. Infact, I'd welcome it, sleeping sickness is -not- fun.

As for why Monsanto is always mentioned in such articles.. they seemed to have developed into a scapegoat for anything alternative related. That is a rather fascinating phenomena.

The problem I have with Monanto's specific brand of genetic tampering is that they are more malicious about it. It's not just that they are making a few minor changes to improve the quality of their crops. They patented their custom genetic code and fiercely defend it. I really do not get how one can patent something that spreads genetically and thus cannot be controlled; but our patent system is messed up.

And then there is the problem of them wanting to make their seeds produce sterile plants so that they can sell the seeds to farmers annually. I'm not sure if they actually did it yet or not since I last heard about it, but doing such a thing would mean they can contaminate nearby crops with their pollen, those crops then produce sterile seeds, and one generation later a massive chunk of an independent farmer's re-usable crop stops reproducing entirely.

I am not expecting evil things from Monsanto because genetics are scary; I expect evil things from them because they are

 

[Crawdaddy]

Re: In today's news...

We could have uge debates about this, but for me personally, some of the concerns are about biological diversity (which isn't exclusive to genetic modification, it's a concern with all forms of domestic breeding, really), and trademarking. The idea that farmers can't keep seeds to plant again from their crops, for example, is deeply worrying to me, as it creates a dependency which is almost feudal in nature. It can also have adverse effects on food prices if the patent for a single crop (like soy) is held by a single company.

But beyond that, GMOs have largely been proven to be as safe and nutritious as non-GMO cultivates, by as independent studies as you get.

Regardless, this wasn't about GMOs, but about a pesticide.

 

[Changer]

Re: In today's news...

We could have uge debates about this, but for me personally, some of the concerns are about biological diversity (which isn't exclusive to genetic modification, it's a concern with all forms of domestic breeding, really), and trademarking. The idea that farmers can't keep seeds to plant again from their crops, for example, is deeply worrying to me, as it creates a dependency which is almost feudal in nature. It can also have adverse effects on food prices if the patent for a single crop (like soy) is held by a single company.

But beyond that, GMOs have largely been proven to be as safe and nutritious as non-GMO cultivates, by as independent studies as you get.

Regardless, this wasn't about GMOs, but about a pesticide.

I really don't mind GMO's. Technically we've been genetically modifying plants since the very beginning of agriculture. We've just gotten better at it. My problem is with Monsanto's abusive business practices and propensity for being at the center of things that have far reaching potential to cause harm. Such as apparently being involved with making a pesticide that causes birth defects.

 

[Crawdaddy]

Re: In today's news...

Yeah, so basically the same thing I said.

 

[chrisroxxx]

Re: In today's news...

snip...

The idea that farmers can't keep seeds to plant again from their crops, for example, is deeply worrying to me, as it creates a dependency which is almost feudal in nature.

...snip

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this issue solved already by mexico? I heard you can buy all the seeds there without any regulations and without any interference of the american seed industry. I'm not talking about the 'laboratory super seeds' here, but well the basic stuff...

I think the question here really is, are you (should you be) allowed to call dibs on a certain seed by altering some of it's genes!?

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

The problem I have with Monanto's specific brand of genetic tampering is that they are more malicious about it. It's not just that they are making a few minor changes to improve the quality of their crops. They patented their custom genetic code and fiercely defend it. I really do not get how one can patent something that spreads genetically and thus cannot be controlled; but our patent system is messed up.

Apologies, it seemed to be about Gene technology issues for XSI at least.

If we argue about the morality of patents it goes into a whole new discussion, but basically, to keep it brief: If X can't invent something without Y instantly copying it, X will not be encouraged to invest money and resources into anything new. Thus Copyright is necessary for the creative process not to stagnate.

We needn't argue that some of the specifics of copyrights are bullshit, but how does following such legal requirements make one 'evil'

And then there is the problem of them wanting to make their seeds produce sterile plants so that they can sell the seeds to farmers annually. I'm not sure if they actually did it yet or not since I last heard about it, but doing such a thing would mean they can contaminate nearby crops with their pollen, those crops then produce sterile seeds, and one generation later a massive chunk of an independent farmer's re-usable crop stops reproducing entirely.

This is hypothetical speculation with no basis in facts, and you've been utterly mislead by farmers that got sued by monsanto for using their seeds past the contract date.

I am not expecting evil things from Monsanto because genetics are scary; I expect evil things from them because they are.

Not by anyhting you've presented.

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

snip......snip
*snip*
I think the question here really is, are you (should you be) allowed to call dibs on a certain seed by altering some of it's genes!?

I guess I should respond a bit lengthier as the discussion expanded.:

Lets talk medicine, they use gene technology too, but I know them better than the farming market. ^^ Basically a pharmaceutical firm has the right to market something for a decade as theirs, no one may copy that substance.

The shadow side is that a company will do only cosmetic alterations to that substance, then sell it again.
The shadow side is that the company has the monoopoly on someones health, and asks huge prices.

But at the same time, I say it is sadly necessary, the question, to say it a bit directly, is 'would you rather have too expensive medicine with a monopoly, or no medicine at all'

And, transcribed this example, excluding speculations like plants that infect others with sterility!! Which fall at the first hurdle that, to multiple with other plants and pass on their genes they can't be sterile, duh.
Would you rather have fast growing, pest resistant seeds that are owned by a corporation, or only the natural growing variant?
I'm not arguing the validity of some of those copyrights, and.. Monsanto is a corporation, they wanna make money, duh, but .. what is a better alternative?

p.s. I hope multi reponses aren't a problem on this forum, I try to go from post to post unless they have similiar points. ^^

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

That's nice and all, but this isn't about genetic manipulation at all

It's about a pesticide that works on mosquitos, and has been fingered out as suspect for potentially working on human fetusses. I'd expect more investigations into it, really.

There are many things people can blame Monsanto for, but in this case I'd blame the government there for putting stuff in the drinking water and ignoring poverty and diseases long enough for this to become a problem in the first place.

And for paying money for fancy GM-mosquitos that would supposedly remove or hinder the non-GM mosquitos, but didn't really do anything like that. Or at least, they haven't had any effect whatsoever aside from removing tax money that was used to pay for it.

Fact: Over 90% of Mosquitos died.
Fact: These Mosquitos carried a variety of diseases that lead to HUMAN DEATHS
Fact: We should so more research.
Fact: We've already done A LOT. None of it points towards the following:
Speculation: They affect the poor babies
Speculation: The government puts stuff in our drinking water! (seriously, this is conspiracy level)
Speculation: We will be paying money for mosquitos.

 

[Ranger Princess]

Re: In today's news...

Triple posters don't get cupcakes.

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

Geez, so much for 'hey new member, lets show ya the ropes, eh? Oh well, guess this works quite effective too, he he.

Though I have to say, rather hostile a response, ain't it? "Hello logical fallacies and corporate shilling. It's nice to see you again. Now go back to the hellpit abyss where you belong."

Really? At least make it melodramatically interesting. Calling people corporate shills just makes you sound like a conspiracy nutter. *chuckles*

'HOW DARE THEE OFFEND MINE VIEWPOINT! I SHALL SMITE THEE WITH THE WRATH OF MY DOWNVOTE; DISGUSTING CREATURE OF SCIENCE!' something like that, make it fancy.

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: In today's news...

An apparent terror attack in Ankara, targeting Turkish military personnel.

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

 

[XSI]

Re: In today's news...

Right as turkey started shooting Syrian groundforces with artillery (Again), of course claiming they were all kurds training to do terror attacks in turkey
But then that's what turkey always says about Kurds.

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

-------
Pervy, you're kinda making an ass out of yourself there, but that's okay. You seem new to the forum and all that stuff so I'd imagine people would give you a fair bit of leniency. At least I'd hope they do, everyone was new here once and that's okay
For rep stuff, we have a reputation thread here http://www.ulmf.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=3033
For in-depth debating, we have this http://www.ulmf.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=1211
Welcome and such
First off, it's a good idea to make one big post rather than three smaller ones. People really don't like double posting, and especially triple posting. It's much easier to read one big post.
That's just how local forum culture turned out to be

Secondly, just for the record, it's never been about GM for me, I don't particularly care about it. I can write a whole lot about it, but in the end it's just a way for companies to get more profit without noticeable increases in quality for the consumer, from everything I've seen.

Thirdly

Speculation: The government puts stuff in our drinking water! (seriously, this is conspiracy level)
Speculation: We will be paying money for mosquitos.

The government there has literally flat out said that they're putting pyriproxyfen in the water supply because the population leaves stagnant water around. Which is where the mosquitos lay their eggs. (Since 2014 even)
And if you think a commercial, for profit company will just do charity work by completely designing a new GM anything for free, then that seems just slightly questionable. They need to make a profit, technology isn't free, and government has asked for those GM mosquitos.

Also, "Conspiracy level" ? There are a lot of conspiracies out there in the world. This is not one of them. This is a case when (Local) government has flat out said "You know, we've put this stuff in the water. But lets not do it anymore". Plenty of other areas still put it in the water.

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links

Because of the doctors and such saying it might be Pyriproxyfen, the (local) government there responded by "Well, lets stop putting it in the water then"
Arguing it's speculation when it's a well-documented fact just makes you look bad.

As said, there are a lot of conspiracies out there. A lot of them are true. A lot of them are fake. Dismissing anything at all because it's 'conspiracy level' indicates that you've just not thought about things. And maybe it's time to start doing that

 

[Crawdaddy]

Re: In today's news...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this issue solved already by mexico? I heard you can buy all the seeds there without any regulations and without any interference of the american seed industry. I'm not talking about the 'laboratory super seeds' here, but well the basic stuff...

It's been standard practice for thousands of years, but proprietary cultivars which can be trademarked changes that.

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

Pervy, you're kinda making an ass out of yourself there, but that's okay.
[...]
Secondly, just for the record, it's never been about GM for me, I don't particularly care about it. I can write a whole lot about it, but in the end it's just a way for companies to get more profit without noticeable increases in quality for the consumer, from everything I've seen.

Thirdly


The government there has literally flat out said that they're putting pyriproxyfen in the water supply because the population leaves stagnant water around. Which is where the mosquitos lay their eggs. (Since 2014 even)
And if you think a commercial, for profit company will just do charity work by completely designing a new GM anything for free, then that seems just slightly questionable. They need to make a profit, technology isn't free, and government has asked for those GM mosquitos.

Also, "Conspiracy level" ? There are a lot of conspiracies out there in the world. This is not one of them. This is a case when (Local) government has flat out said "You know, we've put this stuff in the water. But lets not do it anymore". Plenty of other areas still put it in the water.
(...)
Because of the doctors and such saying it might be Pyriproxyfen, the (local) government there responded by "Well, lets stop putting it in the water then"
Arguing it's speculation when it's a well-documented fact just makes you look bad.

As said, there are a lot of conspiracies out there. A lot of them are true. A lot of them are fake. Dismissing anything at all because it's 'conspiracy level' indicates that you've just not thought about things. And maybe it's time to start doing that

Lets see, first of quite, yes, I'll keep that in mind. Second of..

Sure, an argument should stand on its own merits. That said, there is no argument, because there is no concrete evidence for what you say. You start with a conclusion, and then tell me and others to ask questions. Its intellectually dishonest. It is odd that you tell me to go inform myself, when you yourself have clearly chosen a side already. So here is an informed position, well, a few minutes of reading both sides, really:

We don't know. We are pretty sure Pyriproxyfen doesn't cause Microenchephaly, but we are also not sure if the Zika virus does. Not the most satisfying answer, but they rarely are.

That said, considering the track record of 'alternative sources' vs scientific research, I think I'll wait on the science.

 

[super_slicer]

Re: In today's news...

Awwww PharmaCoTroll™ didn't want to talk back at me

The problem with your statements comes from the fact that you've obviously been indoctrinated into the pharmaceutical industrial complex's cult of loyal followers! All heil SCIENCE! All heil the almighty PROFIT MARGIN!
Also: The Fuck? In a world that is so corrupt that it's KNOWN that our governments have black sites used to conduct actions that would be illegal on their own soil, and get away with it, you're going to try and play anything short of delusional off as a nutty conspiracy theory? No sir, you are the nutty one, nuttier than chunky peanut butter, except the nuts are clinical denial.

As for news... well shit I don't really pay attention to anything outside of piracy (NEWS about piracy is fine, so long as I'm not directly discussing ACTS of piracy, correct?) so in a effort to make it at least look like I'm trying to stay on topic:

You must be registered to see the links

Just grabbed this b/c it's a news link describing what I already know. Unfortunately it sensationalizes '3DM' who are... well... scrubs. They don't actually 'crack' DRM per scene rules, but instead bypass it through a stupid long process of editing memory regions (They do at least have some work ethic, I guess).

Anyway, denuvo is taking much longer to crack than recent protections (We're not even close to how long it took securom 2, or was it starforce?, to be broken) and yet, oddly enough, the companies making games that use this protection ARE NOT SEEING SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED SALES. Though not discussed in the article, titles including MSG:V (A bypass was released that doesn't work for most), Just Cause 3, and Rise of the Tomb Raider have gone uncracked since release. And I believe that here a lack of information is telling, had this been the vindication anti-piracy advocates have been seeking for so long they would have been all too quick to shout 'neener neener' at the top of their lungs.

Unfortunately even without increased sales we are likely to see denuvo adopted by more and more production companies due to it's effectiveness. While you may be under the impression that it's only a problem for pirates, you'd be wrong. First and foremost, denuvo uses an online authentication method requiring a user to go online to activate their product (at least the ticket only expires every 20-30 days, so you won't have to go online EVERY time you want to play a game) opening games using denuvo to a shortened life-span once the denuvo servers go down or stop supporting certain games. Secondly they way in which denuvo protects games is through machine virtualization and code mutation requiring more resources from your computer and even capping performance in many cases (just think of it like putting a car inside of another car, and then trying to drive). And lastly, it's purportedly expensive, meaning that instead of spending all of their resources on delivering a quality product, game development companies will be throwing a big chunk of their budget at denuvo.

While I'm not personally over-worried about dunvos 'uncrackability' or 'the end of piracy' (because lol, those people are as bad as the guy with 'the world is ending' cardboard sign on the street-corner), we're seeing more and more invasive forms of anti-piracy measures being implemented. How long untill 'always online' is the norm? I realize that people without decent internet are the minority, but are those of you with it really willing to have your bandwidth eaten up by games pinging servers to see if you've legitimately bought them? Especially when the best form of anti-piracy is providing a quality product, and treating your customers with respect the way CD Projeckt RED and Bethesda do. As much of a filthy leech that I am, I bought my copies of Witcher 3 and Fallout 4.

(lollin, looks like I got a bit carried away and wrote my own article)

 

[XSI]

Re: In today's news...

Lets see, first of quite, yes, I'll keep that in mind. Second of..

Sure, an argument should stand on its own merits. That said, there is no argument, because there is no concrete evidence for what you say. You start with a conclusion, and then tell me and others to ask questions. Its intellectually dishonest. It is odd that you tell me to go inform myself, when you yourself have clearly chosen a side already. So here is an informed position, well, a few minutes of reading both sides, really:

We don't know. We are pretty sure Pyriproxyfen doesn't cause Microenchephaly, but we are also not sure if the Zika virus does. Not the most satisfying answer, but they rarely are.

That said, considering the track record of 'alternative sources' vs scientific research, I think I'll wait on the science.

Actually, I've only really said that
"Here's a neat report about how Zika virus isn't causing it. And these guys here think it's a chemical. Also, the articles mentioning it say chemical is apparently made by Monsanto's 'strategic partner'"

No conclusion that the chemical causes it. Just that there's these people who think it does, while there's a lot of others who think it does not. They could be wrong. They could be right. I'm not going to decide that.
Clearly they have convinced one local government at least enough to have said local government not put it in the water. Whether or not it's right, I'm not going to judge that.

I did suggest that you'd inform yourself regarding conspiracy stuff. Because, of course. They exist. If everyone would dismiss something because it's 'conspiracy level', we'd have never known about things that are such mundane, public knowledge levels of 'conspiracy' as chicken breasts being injected with water to make them weigh more.
It was a poke at the attitude displayed by calling it 'conspiracy level' and attempting to make fun of it, the 'I know better than you lol' attitude it implies even when you were completely and totally wrong about the specific thing you used it on.

And so, I told you to stop being silly and start thinking about these things. Not just dismissing them as you seemed to do there.

---
Also, anti-piracy shit is almost always bad for consumers. In many cases, piracy is just a big scary strawman bad developers use as excuse for their own incompetence.
Piracy is not a significant impact on sales because the majority of people pirating games would have never bought them in the first place.
GoG and the games on GoG show that, mostly. Witcher series is still a pretty strong series, popular and profitable.

 

[MrMe]

Re: In today's news...

I've not bought Rise of the Tomb Raider because I might as well wait for the goty edition to come out next year/christmas with all the DLCs

 

[Pervy]

Re: In today's news...

Awwww PharmaCoTroll™ didn't want to talk back at me

*snip* you've obviously been indoctrinated into the pharmaceutical industrial complex's cult of loyal followers! All heil SCIENCE! All heil the almighty PROFIT MARGIN!

Bwaha haha ha ha ha You know, I usually do this drinking game where I grab a buddy and we read through flat earther stuff for their insanity, but if I can get the same stuff, AND Hentai, this forum might become my new favourite.

You'll have to try a lil harder than that to beat some of my favourites though. Try mentioning Jews, Reptilians or Jesuits, then, I promise you a full response to all of your points.

@XSI:

Actually, I've only really said that
"Here's a neat report about how Zika virus isn't causing it. And these guys here think it's a chemical. Also, the articles mentioning it say chemical is apparently made by Monsanto's 'strategic partner'"

No conclusion that the chemical causes it. Just that there's these people who think it does, while there's a lot of others who think it does not. They could be wrong. They could be right. I'm not going to decide that.
Clearly they have convinced one local government at least enough to have said local government not put it in the water. Whether or not it's right, I'm not going to judge that.

Fair enough, but. The problem I have, really was the statement of, paraphrased: 'mainstream media doesn't even mention it, only alternative news even talk about it' You seem a smart enough person, what would occams razor direct you to do in such a situation, assume a complicated conspiracy involving all major news channels that no one has uncovered, or that the alternative sources are talking out of their ass, for the most part?

even when you were completely and totally wrong about the specific thing you used it on.

I'm a big enough person to admit that I didn't know the specifics, nope. But you have to admit the whole 'government putting poison into our water' does sound rather wild conspiracy like. As for the rest.. thats semantics, quite aptly even.

Also, anti-piracy shit is almost always bad for consumers. In many cases, piracy is just a big scary strawman bad developers use as excuse for their own incompetence.
Piracy is not a significant impact on sales because the majority of people pirating games would have never bought them in the first place.
GoG and the games on GoG show that, mostly. Witcher series is still a pretty strong series, popular and profitable.

I never said that some copyright stuff wasn't bullshit, something like 70 years after the death of the author of the original works? I mean, Geez. I am however convinced that it is a necessity for economical reasons. I'm not looking at single consumers, but at the big pictures of huge firms not seeing their product protected. That is poison for innovation.

 

[XSI]

Re: In today's news...

(...)
@XSI: (quote)
Fair enough, but. The problem I have, really was the statement of, paraphrased: 'mainstream media doesn't even mention it, only alternative news even talk about it' You seem a smart enough person, what would occams razor direct you to do in such a situation, assume a complicated conspiracy involving all major news channels that no one has uncovered, or that the alternative sources are talking out of their ass, for the most part?

(stuff)

I never said that some copyright stuff wasn't bullshit, something like 70 years after the death of the author of the original works? I mean, Geez. I am however convinced that it is a necessity for economical reasons. I'm not looking at single consumers, but at the big pictures of huge firms not seeing their product protected. That is poison for innovation.

Copyright stuff was a response to slicer by the way. But I do agree. Intellectual property laws need a good looking over and being fixed at some point, but it's going to take a lot of time and lawyers to do it.
They are a necessary thing, but they're outdated and need an update.

As for the media stuff
It's not the first time intentional blackouts have happened regarding international and mainstream media. For one, it's not a 'complicated conspiracy involving all major news channels that no one has uncovered', but rather a well known and widely believed thing that most media are controlled by interest groups and governments.

As one example, have you heard of the Arab spring?
Of course you have, it's what got Tunesia, Libya and Egypt democrasy.
Have you also heard what happened when this Arab Spring spread to US ally Saudi Arabia?
If you did, I'd be surprised.
The Saudis brutally silenced all activists and made sure they wouldn't dare try it.
And no western mainstream media reported that. Some journalists did, but they got their pieces edited out. Whistleblowers about this exist, and are mostly ignored.

CNN is controlled by the US government, and only reports what fits the US government. They had a narrative going about the Arab spring being a good thing, local people wanting freedom and all that. And reporting on it happening in a US ally would mean that the US would either be exposed as a hypocrite (Freedom and democracy! Except for the people living in the states of our allies), or have the US foreign relations get into a pretty bad situation by turning on an ally.

So the easiest way out is to ensure that there are only reports about this on 'alternative' media, thus limiting the range this message
They have had whistleblowers report on this for plenty of news organisations. You can find a lot on it at Wikileaks as well.
And that in addition to journalists having an inherent bias like everyone else, and are thus more likely to report on some things and less likely to report on others.

But to the point, yes. "Government puts stuff in the drinking water!" sounds very conspiracy theorist. That doesn't make it untrue, as governments all over the world can and at some point have put things in the drinking water. Some good, some bad. Mostly with good intentions. But at that point, I should point out that 'Conspiracy theory' is not a bad thing. As mentioned previously, there are a lot of conspiracies out there.
And it's never a good idea to initially dismiss them just because of that, since doing so means missing out on things that are potentially true.

Here's a handy chart on likeliness I found ages ago, it needs updating though

You must be registered to see the links

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: In today's news...

I never said that some copyright stuff wasn't bullshit, something like 70 years after the death of the author of the original works? I mean, Geez. I am however convinced that it is a necessity for economical reasons. I'm not looking at single consumers, but at the big pictures of huge firms not seeing their product protected. That is poison for innovation.

That's a pretty ridiculous argument. If patents expiring after 20 years doesn't stop innovation, there's no reason at all to assume that copyright expiring after 20 years would do so either. In fact, there's every reason to assume that overly long copyright has the exact opposite effect.