Shared publicly  - 
Catch last night's full episode:
Brandon Arce's profile photoRandall Wheeler's profile photoYoram Gat's profile photoDylan Saracco's profile photo
+Rachelle Greene More like the legal system backs the rich and punishes the poor. Copyright cases, for example.
Please explain to me how copyright cases punish the poor.... 
+Dylan Saracco How about this: due to copyright laws, the poor cannot afford to read any of the tens of thousands of academic articles written by government employees at taxpayer expense over the last few decades.
+Yoram Gat  ....That was a rather pitiful attempt at defending    +Parthiv Vora . I think the argument you were trying to make was that copyrights give the creator of a product a monopoly on their product/idea, therefore the cost of said product is more expensive and cannot be afforded by some. This thought process is entirely erroneous. Without copyrights/patents, entrepreneurs lose the incentive to invest, innovate, and create useful goods/ideas that benefit everyone, as well as themselves financially. When people make a transaction, it is apparent that they value the purchased good rather than the money they spent, otherwise they would not make such a trade. Those products that the "rich" produce are bought by people of all classes. The rich become wealthy because they sell product which everyone else willingly buys because it make their lives easier/ more exciting/ et cetera ... The fact that the poor cannot afford as much as the rich is unfortunate, but is because of the success of many rich people that the general poor population in the U.S. is very well off, especially compared to other countries. (Just about every "poor" family in the U.S. owns a car, house or apartment, refrigerator, PC, internet access, and many other goods which are luxuries in many countries across the world.) +Brandon Arce : how did i do? did i make my point? 
Suppose so... Usually these trolls at least have something to say, but guess these ones just gave up
Or maybe "The Colbert Report" just doesnt have many followers... HAHAHA
+Rachelle Greene

> unless, of course, those poor people find their way to a bus line that will take them to a public library, where the subscriptions to databases accessing those scholarly journals are free to library patrons...

First, this is simply false. Public libraries generally do not provide access to academic journals. I guess they too cannot afford the exorbitant prices. One would have to gain access to a college or university library in order to get access to whatever journals those libraries happen to have paid for.

Second, even if it were true, what of it? This is like the government saying you cannot own a phone or a TV and you telling me that this is fine because you can go talk on a public phone or watch TV in a bar.

BTW, your rhetorical bravado is pointless. It is a poor substitute to presenting a valid argument.
+Dylan Saracco

> I think the argument you were trying to make was that [...]

If you actually read what I wrote you wouldn't have to guess. The argument I made was very specific and not difficult to understand.
+Rachelle Greene
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Well played. I can only speak intelligently for so long. When i have to read the nonsense being spewed out by Yoram, i have no choice but to turn it into a joke
+Yoram Gat you're not even addressing his argument, sir.
Just go to bed, we're done here. 
+Rachelle Greene

Full text access through my library - the Palo Alto public library - is minimal. There is access to the Gale Academic OneFile database that purports to provide access to "thousands of journals", but in reality the coverage is very spotty, and, of course, includes only Gale titles. The situation in the San Francisco public library is about the same.

I doubt that the situation in Houston, or most other public libraries, is any better. If Harvard, for example, cannot afford access to academic journals, what chance do public libraries have:

Access through public university branches may be possible - I am not sure. In any case for most people this would involve driving long distances (from Palo Alto I would have to drive to Santa Cruz or to San Francisco, both about an hour away), so it is clearly not a reasonable substitute to free access.

(As for the rest of your comment, it bears no connection to reality and merits no response.)
"As for the rest of your comment, it bears no connection to reality and merits no response" is not an appropriate response simply because you lack the intelligence to construct a legitimate argument. That type of rhetoric is why this country (especially politically) is falling apart.
+Rachelle Greene: I'm sorry i wasn't clear. I totally recognize the legitimacy of your argument, and i would tend to agree with your last point about myself, but the way Yoram makes his argument is nonsense and when people say the type of things i quoted above, it drives me crazy.
Add a comment...