[Smaug] Zero tolerance for P2P?

[Rick Moen]

Quoting CERisE...mass consumer of bazooka gum (cerise@littlegreenmen.armory.com):

> Your idiocy is astounding.

I'm highly impressed by it myself.  But it _pales_ in comparison with
the sheer wonderment that is your ability to disrupt a productive
conversation though belligerent and irrelevant changes of subject.

Let us review, shall we?  First, John Calloway posted the text of Mr.
Perrone's missive.  I replied:

  Isn't it _extremely_ odd that MS-Windows file sharing isn't included in
  that list?  I note this glaring logical inconsistency so that you might
  use it to good tactical effect.

Mr. Perrone's principle objection to the four protocols on his
witch-hunt list (aside from bandwidth usage) was/is their usage to
"share copyrighted material" -- which is his flatfooted way of referring
to copying material whose copyright holders do not permit such
distribution.

The hypocrisy in this declaration lies in the fact that the _primary_ 
protocol used for illegal copying of music/movies/software, MS-Windows
file sharing, is conspicuously missing.

Presumably because Mr. Perrone has, following the usual script,
classified the four named protocols as evil, and the escaped major
offender as good.


Now, you would evidently like to spend your weekend engaging in some 
dumb-ass name-calling contest centering over the definition of the term
"peer to peer", and whether publication of files from one MS-Windows 98
workstation to another qualifies.  You go ahead and do that, then.  Have
fun.  Solo, though.  Me, I have a pressing engagement to sort my lint
collection, instead.

-- 
Cheers,    "Not only does the English language borrow from other languages, 
Rick Moen  it sometimes chases them through dark alleys, hits them over the
rick@linuxmafia.com   head, and goes through their pockets."  -- Eddy Peter