Uriel238 [all pronouns]

I thought phrenology was still a science at the time of the German Reich, only made defunct later. Now I have my doubts.

Social darwinism was disproven in the 1900s and supply-side economics died in the 19th century so it’s not like pseudoscience does not spring up like weeds when rich people want to sponsor it.

Copyright maximalists pretty consistently are glad to pirate stuff that isn’t theirs when it is suddenly expedient to do so.

As with when the studios and labels push for legal anti-piracy measures, I call shenanigans.

This is not our first rodeo: when a ten-year-old girl downloads the latest release in her favorite literary series because she’s too poor, and we no longer support our libraries to have current selections, no-one is going to want to prosecute the little girl who wants to read.

Well, maybe some billionaires might, but the media would have a field day with it.

Regicide.

A feline queen reigns over my apartment complex. It’s a fair regime.

I’m pretty sure (not absolutely) this has appeared in court and even click-wrap licenses, where one clicks to agree to a license with a higher word count than King Lear are not valid due to the end user high administrative burden (reading 20K+ words in the middle of a software install).

There was a period in the 1980s where end users automatically were assumed to agree to licensing, but also licenses were extremely lenient and allowed unlimited use by the licensee without any data access rights by the providing company. 21st century licenses are much more complicated and encroach a lot more on end-user privacy.