When asked why the Times doesn’t see its job as trying to “stop Trump,” Kahn completely missed the point and said journalism’s role is to provide “impartial information” rather than becoming a “propaganda arm.”
That’s pretty rich when you read any of the New York Times’ coverage of countries that are America’s geopolitical enemies. Their articles practically read like State Department press releases.
It was a tough sacrifice, but the really important thing going forward is making sure Elon gets his 56 billion dollar bonus reinstated that was so cruelly taken away.
What’s the lesson to take away?
How? How does a country take that much of a financial beating and still be thriving? Where is the point of being broke and not being able to fund a war anymore?
Not only that but I remember reading a lot of articles about how Russia was going to economically collapse as a result…almost two years ago.
Also a lot of articles about how weak Russia was militarily, how they lost all their troops and equipment already, how morale in their military was so poor the army was just going to run away at any moment, how one major asset after another was destroyed by the Ukrainians…for almost two years now.
Yet here they are still, not collapsed, not defeated. It probably is a good idea to take the media with a grain of salt and realize just because they’re the so-called free press doesn’t make them necessarily the truthful press.
So IP law for individuals = bad, but IP law for corporations = good is the general argument here?
Is there a principled basis for this argument?
It seems like a lot of art like musicians or novelists rely almost entirely on earnings from selling their works to individuals. Wouldn’t a legal regime like you’re advocating basically make producing art for real people a lot less lucrative comparatively and drive those artists into making corporate art and marketing materials?
So what you’re saying is this episode has caused you/others here on /c/piracy to rethink your prior beliefs, and now you see some value in the copyright legal regime?
Conveniently, these moral arguments that are freed from the confines of discrete logic also allow people on /c/piracy to ignore the rules when justifying their own piracy, and still condemn others they already happen to dislike when they do piracy.
Lemmy sure loves copyright and intellectual property once you change who the pirate is.
I read the article but I’m still confused how this works.
My understanding is the herpes virus DNA is integrated into our own. So once the gene editing molecules snip at the herpes virus damaging it, how does the chromosome get put back together?
Is it actually sniping at two places in the herpes genome in a way that the two ends match up and reform while cutting out a section in the middle?