junkscienceisjunk
JunkScienceIsJunk
junkscienceisjunk

Demonoid was not a catalog. Demonoid and what.cd were apples and oranges. There is no other movies, television, or music site that is comparable to what what.cd was.

As someone who regularly creates material bound by intellectual property restrictions, let me chime in here... IP was *never* conceived to reward people for creation. It was a method devised to encourage innovation and production of the “useful arts.” Since it has been proven that innovation and production occur to

I downloaded about 15 albums from torrents in the last three months that were not available on iTunes or Amazon. What.cd was simply the most comprehensive catalog of music in the history of the human race. That’s not an exaggeration. Apple could learn a thing or two. Apple can’t even get album art and artist photos

Those who love music find the enjoyment and excitement in the listening of the music, not the collecting of the music. While I also fondly remember digging through bins for music in the basement record shops in Boston, and the excitement that accompanied finding that rare title or (illegal) bootleg, it was still all

That’s what they said when Oink was shut down. There’s an obvious demand for such sites. Not everybody likes to use Youtube, usually due to bandwidth and quality concerns.

Vinyl box sets and sales of special reissues have reached record highs in the 2010's, despite being as expensive as they’ve ever been. So, obviously people still consider these things special.

They did the ground work. Johnson was on every ballot. That’s no easy feat, evident by the fact that it’s happened only a couple times for third parties in the entire history of the United States.

Who knows? What their platform is, how appealing it is to Americans, what kind of candidates they’ve fielded, and how they’ve since been managed is another topic entirely. The point is that they gained instant success with literally a single candidate. This opened up ballot access (which is a very underrated feat),

There were lots and lots and lots of people who were correct about Iraq, even with Bush’s lies. Hillary was wrong. Period. Given her stances on Libya, Yemen, Syria, Iraq (again), Iran, and Russia, just to name a few, there’s no reason to believe she wouldn’t be wrong again. Her proposed flippant misuse of the military

The one that Hillary voted for?

Why? Look at what Perot did for the Reform Party. That was not built at the local level, that was made popular by all the media coverage associated with his campaign.

I don’t think there’s any reason to add a third party, but historically, third “party” movements have influenced the major parties significantly. Look at the socialist movement in the early 1900's and the civil rights movement in the 50's (before becoming popularized a decade later) as examples of this. Even Perot’s

Just to correct your assumption that the libertarians did not achieve their goals -- the 5% thing is only for matching funds. They gained automatic ballot access in 20-30 states based on the turnout, which is unprecedented for them and a huge victory. You could argue that it won’t matter, but to claim that they didn’t

One alternative viewpoint is that people who supported the two liberal candidates did so because they rejected the two establishment conservative candidates. For example, I find Hillary’s support (and probably continuation) of Obama’s deportation policies to be abhorrent; I think her voting record and activities as

Fuck Hillary Clinton for stealing Gary Johnson’s votes. If she had just endorsed him, he might have had a chance to beat Trump.

I didn’t say anything about their sustainability. I don’t think they had a cohesive philosophy or appealing platform, personally. I’m not surprised they ended up tanking. But the fact that they were put on the map by a single candidate — so much so that we’re talking about them right now, even after two decades of

Perot’s presidential run single-handedly put the Reform Party on the map. From a strategic standpoint, it makes sense for third parties to devote the most resources and make the most noise in the presidential elections.

“Not what I said. I said that getting on the state ballots is not that hard to do”

“Getting on the state ballot is not hard, and getting 15% of a single national poll average is not a huge barrier.”

Getting on the ballot is not that hard? Then explain to me why the Green Party, Reform Party, and other parties were unable to do so in 50 states. In fact, explain to me why it has only been accomplished a few times in US history.