San Diego GOP Chairman Alleged To Be a Fairlight Co-Founder

Airw0lf writes with a claim that appears too implausible to credit, at first glance: "If anyone remembers 'Fairlight' — one of the great groups on the warez scene, you may be interested to know that one of their leaders, Tony Krvaric, is now the chairman of the San Diego Republican Party." A similar report (on which the TorrentFreak story above draws heavily, and which is cited for the same claim about Krvaric made in the above-linked Wikipedia entry) showed up last week in The Raw Story. According to these reports, Krvaric is the same person known as "strider" in the Warez scene. I called Krvaric seeking comment; though he was unavailable, I hope he chooses to comment by email to help inform any followup coverage. A telephone receptionist at the office of the San Diego Republican Party acknowledged that she knew of the claims, but refused further comment, citing workplace rules. While she would not directly acknowledge or deny the truth of the allegations, she asked me to "remember, these are things that happened more than 20 years ago." Since some people have been penalized quite harshly (and some have been jailed) for the sort of large-scale software piracy that Fairlight enabled, it's interesting that Krvaric has enjoyed instead a meteoric rise in conservative politics.

A breath of change.

[Ceiynt (993620)]

Well, at least someone with a crimal background is getting into politics rather then a politition getting into criminal activities.

And yet...

[quag7 (462196)]

It still hasn't gotten weird enough for me.

***TRIAD*** for DEPARTMENT of HOMELAND SECURITY!

Re:And yet...

[vecctor (935163)]

Everyone is of course entitled to their opinion, but I prefer the security policies of RAZOR 1911.

select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[blhack (921171)]

The guy's defense is pretty good. Basically its something along the lines of:

"Look, when I was in high school me and some friends used to trade video games with one another after school. Yes, it was stupid. Yes, it was illegal. No, I haven't been a part of that for a 20 years.".

As far as his email still being @fairlight, that is also pretty easily defendable. "Me and some friends bought our first domain name way back in the early nineties. It was a bit of a novelty and *chuckle* we were kindof a bunch of nerds. I can assure you that I keep that old email address around for purely nostalgic reasons".

TO those who think the guy should hang for this: How many of you would love the opportunity to make a difference by working in politics? Now how many of you can say that you've never logged into an IRC channel that exists for not-so-copyright-friendly reasons? Or downloaded some files from an FTP that you knew you weren't supposed to have. Howabout even set the date on your computer back a few years to use some shareware that was all the rage in the mid 90s?

Even if this guy still *IS* an active member of fairlight, try explaining what the "warez-scene" is to any non-geek and see how far you get.

And honestly, don't you all think its kindof nice to have somebody on the inside that is pretty clearly a technical person? Do you think this guy is going to have any trouble understand WHY net neutrality should even be a question? Do you think it would be hard to explain to this guy why what the RIAA and MPAA are doing is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money?

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[smooth wombat (796938)]

And honestly, don't you all think its kindof nice to have somebody on the inside that is pretty clearly a technical person?

Yes, it would be a welcome change from what we have now. Hopefully the San Diego arm of the Republican Party won't lose their emails detailing how to do more regime changes [atimes.com].

Do you think this guy is going to have any trouble understand WHY net neutrality should even be a question?

No, he understands it perfectly. But that won't make the large donations from telecoms to the Republican Party any less important.

Do you think it would be hard to explain to this guy why what the RIAA and MPAA are doing is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money?

Considering how much money my party has wasted these last 7.3 years, I don't think being fiscally responsible enters into the equation.

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[smooth wombat (796938)]

Because I like to piss them off by not voting for who they think I should vote for and return their surveys indicating how wrong and stupid their policies are.

Whenever asked, I relentlessly harp on their narrow-minded, rights-infringing, budget-busting policies and laugh as they thrash about trying to justify how they've strayed so far from their supposed principles and now coddle religious nutjobs whose goals are similar to ones we're fighting in Afghanistan.

I figure if nothing else, they'll never contact me asking for money.

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[dreamchaser (49529)]

I would tend to agree with the caveat that the Demoncrats are every bit as bad as the Repugnantcans. Some of their evil overlaps and some is different, that's all.

Do you believe it matters which party you are?

[Shivetya (243324)]

because it doesn't. If you don't toe the line your toast.

Both of these so called parties is being wrecked by their fringe. Honestly I think the fringe does more damage to getting moderate Democrats into office than moderate Republicans getting in.

Anyone declaring allegiance to either of these parties needs to be looked at... sorry, they make corporations look good

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[Serge_Tomiko (1178965)]

This is ultimately why liberals fail and will bring this country to civil war.

Conservatives tend to believe liberals are wrong about human nature and the proper function of the state. Liberals believe conservatives are evil.

Think about this long and hard. How long do you really think civilized society can continue when we have people like you shouting their mouths off how evil conservatives are?

The answer is quite simple - it can't last. What is most comical about this is that I have never met a liberal who has any real capacity to fight a civil war. Not only that, your favorite oppressed minority of the day is not only a tiny part of the population but doesn't even reproduce!

Anyway, for your own sake, I'd stick to slightly less inflammatory rhetoric. And, I live in New York City and know quite a few gay professionals. You know what? They are all Republicans. They could care less about gay marriage, but they sure as hell care about the hordes of morons on welfare and high taxes used to ensure those hordes vote for the whining Democratic candidate of the year.

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[elrous0 (869638)]

Oh yes, because Republicans NEVER villianize liberals. They're just thoughtful rationalists who would never resort to underhanded populist smear campaigns to make even the term "liberal" a politically poisonous word. All that reason and civility must explain why Republicans are so well-known for their pro-science stands, polite civil discourse, and highly-educated base.

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[Chris Burke (6130)]

I'm also not naive enough to think that allowing gays to marry would not have an effect on straight couples. They might be bigoted, they might have their head up their ass, they might be ignorant, but that doesn't change the fact that they feel the way they do about it. The anti-gay people DO think that homosexuality is wrong.

Ah, see! Right there is the huge fallacy of the whole argument right there in bold!

Gay marriage does not have any affect whatsoever on straight couples.

Gay marriage does have an affect on anti-gay bigots, regardless of whether they are married or not.

So while "pro-gay" legislation is not in any way "anti-marriage", it is anti-anti-gay.

Which is a rather trivial and meaningless conclusion when you think about it.

But of course, as I pointed out in my first post, the whole problem is that the "pro-marriage" movement is nothing but a linguistic cover for the "anti-gay" movement. The original post I replied to, and you in your last post and this post, conflate "straight couples" with "homophobes". That is simply wrong.

So yeah, once you strip away all the bullshit and get to the bottom you are simply left with "pro-gay marriage legislation pisses off anti-gay bigots". Yes that observation is true but why on earth should I care? Why should anyone who cares about the values of freedom and equality that our nation was founded on care? I don't care that it steps on your toes anymore than I care that the Civil Rights movements stepped on the toes of ignorant racists. Their "right to disagree" does not include the right to discriminate; to the extent that such discrimination is allowed, we must strive to eliminate it.

"Pro-marriage" is explicitly and actively anti-gay, because it explicitly prohibits them from getting married and enshrines discrimination in law.

If you're going to turn around and say the opposite, that they are somehow "anti-you", you're going to have to come up with a lot better than "merely knowing gays exist and can possibly get married offends me". That's your own damn problem, not something they caused other than by existing (and refusing to hide the fact that they exist to protect your delicate sensibilities).

But thank you for at least acknowledging that despite your discomfort, it is in fact none of your business whether anyone else gets married. Would that all bigots would be so enlightened, the world would be a vastly better place.

Re:select * from subjects where content = 'witty'

[mcmonkey (96054)]

Even if this guy still *IS* an active member of fairlight, try explaining what the "warez-scene" is to any non-geek and see how far you get.

How's this: the "warez scene" that grows around the underground trading of software is like the "drug scene" that grows around the underground traffic of illegal drugs. I think that will get me as far as I need to go. Non-geek != idiot.

Now, if asked to explain why a subculture that likes to think itself as intellectually superior uses language that sounds like something out of "Idiocracy," then I would not get far at all.

Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[jmorris42 (1458)]

Don't really care much whether the story is true or not. I'm sure the Statute of Limitations has run out. Hell, I hacked a few warez (nothing like what is credited to this dude though) myself back in the day. But Pirate Gumby don't fly the black flag anymore and I doubt this guy does either. Now if he is still active in the warez scene that would be a career ender.

This is priceless watching the slashdot hivemind try to spin this story. If it were a Dem the groupthink would be "What a cool dude! This guy probably really understands tech and will be down with fightin' the power at the *AA." Put an R after his name and "Scandal! Look how tainted the evil Rethuglicans are, how dare they mention any of our scandals, most especially those related to our Obamessiah."

Re:Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[Daniel Dvorkin (106857)]

You don't get it, do you? The sin is not, in and of itself, in being a Republican. The sin is the hypocrisy. The Republicans present themselves as the law'n'order party. Vote for us, they say, and we'll keep you safe from all those eeevil dark-skinned criminals and Muslim terrorists and hippie commie weirdos. Go to an approved church supported by your tax dollars, put no legal restrictions on the government, foot the bill for endless war, give us total control of your life, and in return the streets will be safe for God-Fearing Real Americans.

It really doesn't matter that John McCain dumped his wife (who waited for him the whole time he was a POW) for a newer model. It doesn't matter that Larry Craig likes cruising for anonymous blowjobs in men's rooms. It doesn't even matter all that much that Rush Limbaugh had to smuggle Viagra on a sex tour so he could get it up for underage hookers, and it matters only a little more that George W. Bush was a cokehead and a deserter, or that Laura Bush got away with drunk-driving manslaughter. And no, it doesn't matter at all that Tony Krvaric used to be a major warez d00d. What does matter, very much, is that the party which builds its entire platform on God and Country and Traditional Values continues to embrace these people.

Re:Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[Anonymous Cowtard (573891)]

I'm definitely not pro-Republican but why does there seem to be this notion that people are hypocrites because they change their minds about things over the years? So if I do something I stupid when I'm younger and grow to regret it and speak against it as I age, I'm a hypocrite? Hrm... here I thought I was learning from my mistakes. Are we seriously no longer allowed to grow as people and instead are expected to carry the same beliefs, world views and approaches to life from day one until the grave with no hope to grow or change?

Re:Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[Daniel Dvorkin (106857)]

So if I do something I stupid when I'm younger and grow to regret it and speak against it as I age, I'm a hypocrite?

Not at all, and that were what Krvaric were doing, no problem. But that's not what he's doing; instead, in typical Republican fashion, he's blowing it off and suggesting that it must be Those Evil Lefties making an issue of it for Their Own Nefarious Purposes.

From the Raw Story article:

"Apparently there's a hit piece floating around on me, 'exposing' my wild high school, teenage years where I was in a computer club where we swapped Commodore 64 games (similar to how kids swap mp3 music files these days)," he wrote Monday. ... "I don't know who is spreading this," he concluded, "but just wanted to let you know what's going on out there. Likely it's someone who wants us to take our eye off the ball in 2008, be it the democrats, labor or someone else. Either way, we're not going to let them get away with it. Thanks for your leadership." ... Strider was asked in an interview if he had any regrets about his hacking days. "No," he replied.

Re:Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[mcmonkey (96054)]

why does there seem to be this notion that people are hypocrites because they change their minds about things over the years?

Buddy, I can tell the '60s were good to you. Your concepts of time are completely warped.

How is it "learning from mistakes" or "growing over the years" when, IN THE SAME SPEACH, Mitt Romney attacks those in the Middle East that are trying to establish nation governments based on religious law and then turns around and says the USA should base its government on religious law?

How is it "growth" or "change" to attack Obama for association with a man who says wacky things such as the attacks on 9/11/2001 were punishment on the USA for past mis-deeds while McCain is actively courting the support of a man who says wacky things such as the attacks on 9/11/2001 were punishment on the USA for past mis-deeds?

To say, my opinions when I was 20 are not the same as my opinions when I am 40, is not hypocrisy. To say, my opinions when talking about a democrat are not the same as my opinions when I am talking about a republican, that is hypocrisy.

Re:Who knows, but it WAS twenty years ago

[JustinOpinion (1246824)]

I agree with you that people (especially politicians) should be allowed to change their minds, to say "I was wrong--with new data and experience, this is what I now believe." However you still must present a consistent view, and not be hypocritical. Some examples of consistent viewpoints would be:

1. I engaged in copyright infringement as a teenager. I now understand that copyright infringement is a terrible thing, and should be punished severely. I should have been punished severely as a teenager, and I will work to make sure that everyone is punished severely for copyright infringement.

2. I engaged in copyright infringement as a teenager. I now understand that copyright infringement is detrimental overall. We as a society should find ways to encourage citizens to respect copyright. However, we all understand that teenagers sometimes do ill-conceived things, so the law should not be overly harsh in dealing with these transgressions. I will work to make sure that copyright law is enforced, without its penalties being unfairly large.

3. I engaged in copyright infringement as a teenager. I now understand that copyright is a bad law, and should be radically altered. I was morally right to ignore copyright as a teenager, and I will work to change the law so that everyone can legally engage in those activities.

Any of those viewpoints is consistent (though I only agree with one of them). The problem is when politicians try to have it both ways. In this case, it seems like he wants to pass it off as some sort of small youthful indiscretion. That's fine--so long as you use your political power to make sure that others enjoy the same implicit forgiveness that you are claiming for yourself.

It would be the height of hypocrisy to claim that this youthful indiscretion was no big deal, but then vote in favor of laws making copyright law stricter (or indeed standing by and allowing other indiscreet youths to be slapped with massive penalties when you were not).

(Sidenote: For some people, #1 would only be consistent with the additional "...and I submit myself for the appropriate harsh punishment at this time." Whether or not there should be a statute of limitations on moral high-ground issues is unclear to me (e.g. a youth who is sued may still be paying off the debt 20 years later... so why shouldn't a 20-year old crime be punished?).)

Re:Go check your facts.

[Toonol (1057698)]

I absolutely deny that the Republicans are worse than the Democrats. They're both terrible. Until people get over this irrational defense of politicians just because they happen to be in the 'correct' party, there's not going to be any substantial progress against the corruption that both parties are drowning in.

F.U.

[mcmonkey (96054)]

This is priceless watching the slashdot hivemind try to spin this story.

The republicans made an issue of what Bill Clinton was doing 20 years ago. The republicans made an issue of what John Kerry was doing 20 years ago. It's the republicans who like digging up people's past to manufacture scandal.

So when it comes out a republican might have some extra-legal activities in his past, and the official response is, "oh, well that was 20 years ago. That's not relevant now." How is it the "slashdot hivemind" to notice the hypocrisy?

How is it spin to point out that the republicans consistently do the very same things they attack others for?

REPEAT AFTER ME:

[spun (1352)]

There is no Slashdot Hivemind.

That is a phrase used as an ad hominem to try to discredit a particular point of view. Whenever you see someone use this phrase, it is a sure sign they have no better argument than appeal to emotion.

I downloaded once in college

[by Anonymous Coward]

But I never installed. It was a diffent time back then. We were innocent.

What's his record?

[Just Some Guy (3352)]

It's not that interesting that someone with an unconventional past rises up through political ranks. The real question for me is whether he retains any of those earlier values. Since he knows a whole lot more about copyright than most, what's his take on the DMCA etc.? Does his political record have much to say about it?

Re:What's his record?

[Al Dimond (792444)]

If a politician drove drunk all over San Diego every Friday after getting home from the bars we wouldn't call him an expert on driving. Why should we think someone is knowledgeable about copyright law just because he's violated it a lot?

it'll be interesting to see what he does

[theprophetofmephisto (1163535)]

i'm going to be following his positions now, as i'm really curious what kind of tech-related positions he'll be taking. i mean, what kind of net neutrality position will he take? that's the kind of stuff that, assuming he succeeds, will open the door for other techie politicians to actually get into the field, rather than the current bunch of technically inept imbeciles that currently populate most higher offices.

FTL FTW

[dave562 (969951)]

Those guys had some quality releases. Wasn't one of the founders of Razor 1911 involved in some political issues a few years ago too?

WTF? Is it just me?

[zappepcs (820751)]

Since some people have been penalized quite harshly (and some have been jailed) for the sort of large-scale software piracy that Fairlight enabled, it's interesting that Krvaric has enjoyed instead a meteoric rise in conservative politics.

Is it just me that remembers some of the OTHER criminals the GOP has working for them, never mind running for office?

WOW

Cheap shots:

[should_be_linear (779431)]

- I guess his primary objective will be to ban Atari ST computers.
- I am glad for Fairlight but did Northstar made it to goverment already?
- If he can program all Amiga specialized chips in his demos, he can run any city in the world easily.
- I will vote him only if he promise free copy of Photoshop for all, with license key generator.
- For whatever reason, his speech always ends with "Greetings to" section.

He knows assembly, hye can code clean code!

[jameskojiro (705701)]

Hopefully he will take the same approach with writing bills if he ever gets a political office. I would love to see what his code... errr laws can do.

That would be some tightly written legislation!

Persecution complex much?

[AdamThor (995520)]

Sounds like some of my fellow commenters are expecting this guy to get screwed over this. I don't find myself hoping for that, however. I simply would like to know what his IP views were back in the day, what they are now, and how he reconciles the two. I want to know his position.

Copyright law? Get a clue.

[by Anonymous Coward]

You all are missing the point.

This individual is involved in picking what voting machines are purchased for the district.

Electronic voting machines.

Hackable electronic voting machines.

If I was a Democratic party official I would be filing restraining orders against this guy having anything to do with e-voting systems... or even better, pushing hard for machines that produce voter-verified paper trails.

See more here: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5945

An outright lie and vote grab by GOP

[plasmacutter (901737)]

The day a republican adopts a hobby as progressive as pioneering a warez group is the day he ceases to be a republican and becomes something else.

The republicans face a huge issue in the '08 election as Obama has pretty much locked up the young vote in this country, and has mobilized more funds from individual citizens than bush AND kerry did in '04 from all their corporate cronies.

This false little leak only proves that all politicians do know that downloading is an accepted and practiced activity among people ages 11-30, and that theyre trying spread this rumor to try to fool people into thinking they'll have a softer line on copyright if elected.

Why the outcry?

[Opportunist (166417)]

A criminal going into politics? Where's the news?

Look on the bright side, at least he kinda has to understand what he votes for when another law about "that whole computer stuff" comes up.

ex warezer?

[nurb432 (527695)]

He's got my vote.

And remember, you can never really leave the family.

IOIYAAR

[Bassman59 (519820)]

"It's OK if you are a Republican."

Status quo...

[actionbastard (1206160)]

I'm sure he's making huge donations to the GOP from all the proceeds from the sale of those 'pirated' Commodore 64 game cartridges.
'Drink-or-Die' was the epitome of the warez scene. They are dead.
All that follow are teenagers who fantisize they are Kevin Mitnick [takedown.com], if they even know who he is.

There are bigger, more dangerous, criminals prowling the halls of our legislative institutions.
This guy is just a dumbass with a questionable past.

WHY THE FUCK SHOULD HE REPLY BY EMAIL?

[by Anonymous Coward]

Everything you need is in the nfo, lamer!

Speculative bias

[MSTCrow5429 (642744)]

...it's interesting that Krvaric has enjoyed instead a meteoric rise in conservative politics.

It is? Why? I am curious if the slaphappy author is even familiar enough with politics to understand one could more easily argue that there is no contradiction in the proposed scenario from a conservative position.

I Call shenanigans

[KutuluWare (791333)]

I called Krvaric seeking comment

Clearly this story is a hoax. No slashdot editor would EVER stoop to -- well -- EDITING a story before posting it!

The good news is, even if Krvaric doesn't comment on this story in time to be relevant, he'll have at least 9 more tries over the next month as the story gets reposted.

It's definitely true

[Moth Boy (990006)]

Try looking at his website on www.archive.org. Krvaric had it blocked within a few days of the story on rawstory being picked up and talked about on some local San Diego forums. There are also old pics of Krvaric as Strider that are clearly the same guy. After he founded Fairlight, his "legitimate" business was to sell devices to make illegal copies of games. There are strong indications that at a minimum he maintained ties to Fairlight until very recently, if he wasn't actively involved. What I am much more interested in is how an immigrant born in Sweden of immigrant Croatian parents, becomes the head of the Republican party in the 7ty largest city in the US only 4 years after being a naturalized citizen. The man has been eligible to vote in exactly 1 presidential election. There is a much bigger story here than whether you think it was cool or not that he dabbled (at the very least) in the warez scene.

Looks like him

[CrazyKen (1109907)]

I'm not sure of the credibility of this site [c64.org] but the picture there sure looks like him at a younger age, and the bio information says he lives in San Diego and is a member of the republican party. Additionally, if you use the Google cache page [209.85.173.104], it says that his real name is "Tony".

Regardless of whether it's him or not, people change. We've all done stupid things when we were young. I just hope that, if he's confronted about it, he doesn't try to lie. Hell, he can put it the same way Clinton did when people asked if he smoked marijuana. "I cracked software but didn't distribute it". That last part is a joke. :-)

And now /. will become pro-copyright

[ClientNine (1261974)]

Pirates are heroes, unless they are Republicans, in which case they are suddenly considered thieves. Disappointing, yet predictable. If this guy was a Democrat the slashdot crowd would be crowing about how this is a great example of how people who abuse intellectual property are really productive citizens, etc etc.

Embarassing.

And let me guess-- like most posts pointing out the left-leaning hypocrisy so rampant here in the last five years or so, this will get modded as 'flamebait'. :/

Similarities between Warez and Political scenes?

[SageLikeFool (547462)]

This just shows that many people within politics feel that it is just another game to be hacked/cracked.

Regardless of party affiliation, if this allegation is true it is too bad. He probably did a lot less damage to society as a Warez group leader then he could )at least theoretically) do while gaming the system as head of a political party.

fairlight not just a warez group

[spir0 (319821)]

Fairlight were not just a warez group, but that is what people seem to remember them for now.

In fact, they were one of the greatest demogroups [wikipedia.org] on the planet. They are even still active, having gone from c64, to Amiga, to PC demos. Here's a big list of Fairlight demos [pouet.net].

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

[by Anonymous Coward]

Weird to see this story "break" on /., but anyhoo....

Tony started FLT in the 80s. Yes, they cracked (very different to "hacked") the copy protection on a bunch of games, mostly on the c64. At the time it was not explicitly banned in Sweden I believe.

We were teenagers. We were interested in computers. The warez and demo scenes were an outlet. Noone made any money from it. None of us could have actually afforded to buy the games anyway. It was a social activity, coding demos and snailswapping disks with foreigners. The large majority of games I copied were never even loaded once. It was like collecting stamps.

Dont confuse it with the modern, dirty, movie and mp3 warez scene. This was something altogether different.

The thing is, Strider is a bright and thoughtful guy. If something he did 20 years ago comes back to haunt him now, and ruins an otherwise distinguished career, there is no justice.

Yet another Rep. HYPOCRITE

[Jane Q. Public (1010737)]

Yes, I did read the posts above about this.

It is one thing to say, even as GWB did, "I made a mistake in my younger years." It is quite another thing to pretend that it never happened, and that others are out to get you in a smear campaign for merely mentioning it. And even GWB was guilty of gross hypocrisy when he said it was just a youthful mistake, and then helped pass laws to put other "youths" in prison for multiple years for the same "mistakes". But this is even worse.

I am TIRED of, and ANGRY about, seeing all these ball-less Republicans who profess to do no evil, while they send the children of others off to die in foreign lands for their own corporate and personal profit. Even if he is not a supporter of this "non-war", he is following the typical recent "ball-less Republican" profile, so he would be bound to get lumped in with the rest if/when the lynching finally came around, if people ever got that pissed off. From what I read these days, some are pretty close.

I can accept dastards. I can accept con men. At least those can be dealt with in a straightforward manner. But I believe there is a special place in Hell for true hypocrites like this guy.

And please, you people who call yourselves Republicans, don't write back and say that the Democrats are just as bad. Bullshit. That might have been true in the past, but within the last 8 or 10 years or so, that simply is not so. The Republican party as a whole (yes I am generalizing) have really set a record and earned a special reputation. Why they, themselves, do not seem to see the disdain with which others look at them is a mystery to me.

Interesting, but not surprising

[jandersen (462034)]

it's interesting that Krvaric has enjoyed instead a meteoric rise in conservative politics.

People change their attitudes and beliefs when they get older, sometimes radically so. But I don't think their basic personality can change much - if you are bold, enterprising and feel that the rules don't apply to you when you are young, then you are likely to be the same way when you get older. And while "conservative" according to the dictionary means something like "someone who wants to preserve the existing", in American politics it more often seems to mean "reactionary, narrow-minded and selfish" - whereas "libertarian" means "reactionary, open-minded and selfish" ;-). (Note to the reader: This is of course meant as a sophisticated joke)

A young person who is a leader of organized SW piracy, for lack of a better word, probably doesn't feel that the rules apply to him - same goes for a surprising number of politicians; his perspective on the world is probably not the widest, and he probably sees himself as a "revolutionary" - the distance from "revolutionary" to "reactionary" is surprisingly short, so there is nothing strange in such a person becoming a politically conservative.

Now, before anybody gets going with how much of a communist I am, and what should be done to that kind of people, with a piece of rope and a tall tree, I would like to state that I am a conservative, in the traditional sense: I would like to conserve the good, old things (such as our beautiful nature), I would like to see us return to the good, old, traditional values, like personal freedom, responsibility and accountability, equality under the law, simple decency in dealing with others, and so on. Now, please go ahead and hang me.

Re: fairlight not just a warez group

[gabrieltss (64078)]

Fairlight also was in the Amiga scene. I have a bunch of their grfx/Music demos for the Amiga. And a quite a few of their music MODS. Anyone remember Northstar/Fairlight demos? Thanks to my still running Amiga 2000 I can still enjoy them. Along with UAE on Linux I can enojy them on the PC as well. Hey a pirate as a kid and a pirate (politician) as an adult. Where is this wrong? I lived through the 80's/90's pirate/demo scene with c64's and Amiga's It was very huge in Europe when I was there. The pirate/demo groups had some of the MOST talentend programmers of the time. Many of them moved on to bigger and better things. Many of them just teenagers at the time went right from high school to working for commercial game companies. Heck even when I was 22 at the time I thought I was a hot shit 'C' programmer but I met a number of kids that ran circles around me in Europe. The fact is you HAD to be a programmer to REALLY crack software. Using someone else pre-written crack tools didn't count. You had to know how to dissassemble, use memory monitors, hack assembly and use an assembler etc.. Some really good stuff came out of that time. Gone are the days of Northstar, Fairlight, Tristar, Red Sector, The Crusaders, Vision Factory, Razor 1911, Kefrens. There was some GREAT stuff that came of the "scene" not just warez - I still have TONS of the demos and soundtracker mods from that time.

Ah yes...

[McNihil (612243)]

This is good news. Very good news. In fact it has made my day!

Re:Republican Motto:

[by Anonymous Coward]

More like: do what you want until you get caught, then lie, deny, fire someone and next time be slightly more careful.

Re:Duh

[spun (1352)]

Republicans and Democrats are both for protecting the interests of big money. Can you name any Republicans advocating for copyright reform?

Re:Duh

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

> they want everyone else to pay for the public good of a social safety net

Um, I'm pretty sure Libertarians are against the existence of a taxpayer-supported safety net in most cases, so I'm not sure how you think this translates into wanting "everyone else to pay for one." They don't want it to exist, period, meaning that they obviously don't want to pay for it. Whether they want other people to be able to pay for it (voluntarily, perhaps), or whether they're against it more fundamentally, is a bit more complex.

90% of political disagreements basically boil down to fundamental differences of opinion as to whether government is a good deal for what you pay. Socialists and leftists mostly feel that you get a good ROI for your tax dollar; supporting a larger government makes sense when taken from this premise. Libertarians and true conservatives don't feel that it's money well spent, and would cut government to the bare minimum on this basis. (Incidentally: 'progressive' tax policies that increase the marginal tax rate based on income pretty much guarantee that the wealthy will always be mostly conservative, since they'll end up paying more for basically the same services.)

One of the reasons political discourse in the U.S. is so unproductive (IMO, anyway) is because there's too much emotional rhetoric and very little discussion about the fundamental issue, which is whether or not most people are getting a good deal for what they're paying.

Re:Duh

[halivar (535827)]

It's surprising that this doesn't get more attention, especially from a group that leans as libertarian as Slashdot: the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA are made up of companies that donate almost overwhelmingly to progressive candidates.

What surprises me is not that a tech-savvy, cartel-snubbing crypto-anarchist is in the Republican party. What surprises me is that more aren't.

PS: We should obey the law: from a moral, ethical, and religious stance I believe this. That doesn't mean the law is always right.

Re:This gives new meaning to the phrase...

[halivar (535827)]

I believe you meant "Republican 1337".

Re:Republican Motto:

[moderatorrater (1095745)]

Two things wrong with that: first, people are allowed to change how they believe and, indeed, most parts of their personality. Second, strict copyright enforcement is neither republican nor democrat, liberal nor conservative. It's an artificial control of the market, and as such it's bad according to the free market evangelists.

Republicans are reaching the status of Microsoft on Slashdot, getting bashed for everything whether they deserve it or not.

Re:Republican Motto:

[evilphish_mi (1282588)]

Democrats do the same damn thing. Anybody who has ever seen a political ad knows this.

Re:Republican Motto:

[moderatorrater (1095745)]

Double standard. Republicans bash democrats endlessly, but whine about it whenever anyone hits back.

Not really. Bashing happens back and forth, and I call shenanigans if it's unfair either way, which his statement clearly was.

Republicans are allowed to say they've changed, but not Democrats. Republicans love to point out Democrat's youthful indiscretions, so turnabout is fair play

Really? Because I seem to remember President Bush getting bashed over what he was doing in Vietnam, over his alcoholism, and over many other things in his past. Seems like maybe analyzing peoples' past behavior cuts both ways.

Markets need controls

Indeed they do and I never argued differently, I only said that very conservative people would tend to make that argument. Since republicans tend towards the conservative side, placing republicans on the side of copyright seems a little silly.

Just because some republicans or some democrats act a certain doesn't mean they all do, and acting like they do is counterproductive. You don't raise the level of dialogue by going to the level of the lowest common denominator.

Re:Republican Motto:

[unitron (5733)]

Because I seem to remember President Bush getting bashed over what he was doing in Vietnam...

Bush was in Vietnam? It must have been a super-duper top secret mission during the time when the National Guard couldn't find him.

Re:Republican Motto:

[spun (1352)]

Journalists do not control the media. Editors and owners do, and they are overwhelmingly Republican.

Re:Republican Motto:

[moderatorrater (1095745)]

You're asking for proof, but you haven't been offering it yourself. Would you like to back up your claim?

Re:Republican Motto:

[thePowerOfGrayskull (905905)]

I'm curious - Fox News or the opinion shows on Fox News channel? The biggest issue Fox seems to have is that their opinion shows are on the channel called "Fox News" - which understandably causes people to think that their news is all right-wing biased.

Right wing nutjob motto

[spun (1352)]

Do as I say or you hate America and support the terrorists.

Seriously, I haven't gotten enough flamebait moderation recently. Help me out here.

Re:Right wing nutjob motto

[Faylone (880739)]

Oh, you gotta do better than that, how about... Macs Suck! Linux is for communists hippies! Bill Gates is Jesus!

So what did he say? Dynastic Succession...

[Ungrounded Lightning (62228)]

Do as I say, not as I do.

So what did he actually say? Or are you just ASSUMING he quacks the same duckspeak you believe all Republicans quack?

In case you hadn't noticed, there's a war of dynastic succession going on in the GOP. The Constitutionalists, Libertarian Minarchists, and a plethora of other freedom-loving people (mainly inspired by Ron Paul) are attempting to wrest the party from the death-grip of the neocon faction. It's just getting started, and it's already getting very ugly. (See _The Revolution - a manefesto_ - just out and #1 on Amazon.)

Now I have no idea whether Tony Krvaric himself is a "Ron Paul Republican". But that group is large, largely young, and (so far) mostly internet-connected. And their ideology is a close match to that of many of the denizens of Slashdot.

So don't be surprised to see a LOT of people with reps like Tony's in the Republican party in the near future. Complete with mud-slinging campaigns against them, as the powers-that-be try frantically to keep hold of the political machinery.

Re:Republican Motto:

[Z34107 (925136)]

What if this guy were a Democrat instead? Would it be hypocrisy, or "Hooray, somebody knowledgeable about computers is in politics"?

So, famous internet hacker is GOP chairman. Watch out, Diebold...

Re:Republican Motto:

[smitty_one_each (243267)]

Oh, there are some Inconvenient Truths about the hypocrisy charge and politicians of every stripe, shade, and aroma.
I refer to my little plastic composter drum as "Congress", the worms living therein as "Politicians", and their product as "Legislation". A truth one surely doesn't want to handle without gloves.

Re:And how do you know what fairlight is?

[Zhe Mappel (607548)]

I mean, if this guy were a marxist or libertarian, your comments would probably be different anyway, right? Geesh.

What a lovely idea if the head of the San Diego GOP were revealed as a Marxist!

Indeed, I would say, "There's hope for San Diego yet!"