Board Logo
« Drone Discussion #10 »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Dec 14th, 2017, 07:03am


Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

*Totally FREE 24/7 Access *Your Nickname and Avatar *Private Messages

*Join today and be a part of one of the largest UFO sites on the Net.


« Previous Topic | Next Topic »
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59  ...  100 Notify Send Topic Print
 sticky  Author  Topic: Drone Discussion #10  (Read 70402 times)
Klatunictobarata
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #840 on: Oct 19th, 2009, 9:45pm »

on Oct 19th, 2009, 7:22pm, Katterfelto wrote:
So true but only to about 12 people on this planet it seems.
Actually that is quite statistically insignificant to be significant. Inverse infinite insignificancy. grin
Be careful speaking Latin around here. It attracts all types.



That's what I don't understand, Katt:

The drones/Isaac publicity wasn't very widespread to begin with, save the internet, yet the only one to have seemingly profited from it is Alienware/Dell.

Might that be the simple solution to a complex question?
User IP Logged

Radi
Full Member
ImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




Homepage PM


Posts: 176
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #841 on: Oct 19th, 2009, 10:43pm »

on Oct 19th, 2009, 5:47pm, tomi01uk wrote:
I'll put a thread together the more I learn and hope you will help .. As a thread killer I'll need it smiley

Or someone else start the thread please to give any insights into the GNU liscense model possibility.. etc.. even if to quash this whole idea entirely..


Ahhh...Since there is no physical software code the GPL/LGPL/BSD/GNU does not apply. These license types are only for software code and not graphics............The closest license that would apply to the graphics besides public domain is Creative Commons..........
But since there is no defining CC copyright marks on the site or the LAP its not that type either......
I have helped to defend the GPL for many years..So I know a little bit about this area of licenses.. wink laugh

Tomi before bringing this all up first like I have said and others have said DO THE RESEARCH before posting...Cause this association of a software license to the LAP makes the 5 demension theory more appealing....

Heres some links to get you started....DB was the man..
http://www.drunkenblog.com/drunkenblog-archives/000534.html

Scroll to..
A quick primer of licenses and copyrights.......Then read further past that for more info on types...
Or perhaps just mail the EFF directly and pose the questions to them rather then posting here non-issues...
http://www.eff.org/
« Last Edit: Oct 19th, 2009, 11:31pm by Radi » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #842 on: Oct 20th, 2009, 07:25am »

on Oct 19th, 2009, 7:34pm, DrDil wrote:
(Down on the farm).



Are you suggesting Lev is a good ole Virginia Farm Boy? huh

I have alway thought there was something spooky about our ole Lev. wink


User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Katterfelto
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #843 on: Oct 20th, 2009, 6:43pm »

Funny, Mask is silent. Must not be enough interest being shown in this hoax for any comments to be made about it. laugh

Why is all I ask. Why? grin

Who is all I ask. Who? grin
« Last Edit: Oct 20th, 2009, 7:18pm by Katterfelto » User IP Logged

Marvin
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting....


PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 1119
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #844 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 07:16am »

User Image

The whole thing stinks like yesterday's dirty diapers.
« Last Edit: Oct 22nd, 2009, 07:21am by Marvin » User IP Logged

Oh Goody! My Illudiom Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator!

User Image

"You naughty earth specimens!"
Leibowitz
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 17
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #845 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 09:58am »

After looking over the posts here I'd like to ask something.

Is the prevailing assumption that Alienware and Co. created the drones and the Isaac material as a viral commercial endeavor? If so, why did they NOT use the "drone craft", or other objects presented by "Isaac" in any of their marketing, especially in light of the coverage by Fox news?

Did they become embarrassed by the growth of the meme? And if so, why do they continue to use the LAP designs? I would assume their target audience and customers (those into high end gaming machines) would be well versed in the thrashing that the drone/Isaac material has received? Also notice that there is no reference to the Isaac report material in their promotional use of the designs, unless I've missed that somewhere.

Clearly the LAP designs were created before the "drones", or they wouldn't be plastered to them, no?

The drones were good enough for Sarah Connor, but Alienware said, "no way"?

Carry on.

User IP Logged

DrDil
Global Moderator
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar

Fighting against truth decay!!


Homepage PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 4224
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #846 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 1:07pm »

on Oct 22nd, 2009, 09:58am, Leibowitz wrote:
Is the prevailing assumption that Alienware and Co. created the drones and the Isaac material as a viral commercial endeavor? If so, why did they NOT use the "drone craft", or other objects presented by "Isaac" in any of their marketing, especially in light of the coverage by Fox news?

Nope.

That theory has indeed been sufficient for the majority of posters and (I think) nearly all of those that fall into the Ďpro-hoaxí camp believe itís so, I believe Iím something of the exception (or at least in the minority) amongst those that believe itís an out and out (i.e. 100%) hoax and yet DONíT believe that any form of corporate advertising is behind it.
User IP Logged

Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies,
Tongue-tied & twisted, just an earth-bound misfit.
Katterfelto
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #847 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 1:23pm »

on Oct 22nd, 2009, 1:07pm, DrDil wrote:
Nope.

That theory has indeed been sufficient for the majority of posters and (I think) nearly all of those that fall into the Ďpro-hoaxí camp believe itís so, I believe Iím something of the exception (or at least in the minority) amongst those that believe itís an out and out (i.e. 100%) hoax and yet DONíT believe that any form of corporate advertising is behind it.

I'm more in the hoax for jollies camp with a minor in some motive to stick it to someone. No big conspiracy, disinfo or marketing. I never could understand the limited audience aspect of the whole thing. undecided
My thoughts anyway. smiley
User IP Logged

SiddReader
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #848 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:28pm »

So we are three. Since nobody else is here we have a 3:0 for the jolly jumper.
User IP Logged

Klatunictobarata
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #849 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:33pm »

on Oct 22nd, 2009, 1:23pm, Katterfelto wrote:
I'm more in the hoax for jollies camp with a minor in some motive to stick it to someone. No big conspiracy, disinfo or marketing. I never could understand the limited audience aspect of the whole thing. undecided
My thoughts anyway. smiley




The whole meme has had very limited exposure and wasn't all that popular even with it's brief national exposure - witness Sarah Connor (which died due to poor ratings) and the Mom & Pop retiree PI effort.

And personally, I never viewed the drones as being anything but butt-ugly.

Stan Friedman's description and kiss-off that it looks like some kind of lawn sprinkler was spot-on.

What we see now are some birds picking on the rotting carcass of a very dead stillborn creature.

And please: no 'carrion' jokes allowed!
User IP Logged

Leibowitz
Junior Member
ImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 17
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #850 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 6:47pm »

Thanks for the replies. I would concur with DrDil.

You know, if it weren't for the hoaxes and mundane misidentified objects, ufology would be pretty boring, but that's just my opinion. smiley
User IP Logged

Jeddyhi
Senior Member
ImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM

Gender: Male
Posts: 589
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #851 on: Oct 22nd, 2009, 9:06pm »

on Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:33pm, Klatunictobarata wrote:
The whole meme has had very limited exposure and wasn't all that popular even with it's brief national exposure - witness Sarah Connor (which died due to poor ratings) and the Mom & Pop retiree PI effort.

And personally, I never viewed the drones as being anything but butt-ugly.

Stan Friedman's description and kiss-off that it looks like some kind of lawn sprinkler was spot-on.

What we see now are some birds picking on the rotting carcass of a very dead stillborn creature.

And please: no 'carrion' jokes allowed!


I have to say I could not agree more.
User IP Logged

"Nothing will ever claim ownership of the original Drone information, so copyright is not a question. Use it."- Masker33
masker33
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #852 on: Oct 23rd, 2009, 08:14am »

Good.
User IP Logged

masker33
Guest
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #853 on: Oct 23rd, 2009, 08:48am »

Very good.
« Last Edit: Oct 23rd, 2009, 08:51am by masker33 » User IP Logged

tommi01
Gold Member
ImageImageImageImageImage


member is offline

Avatar




PM


Posts: 3955
xx Re: Drone Discussion #10
« Reply #854 on: Oct 23rd, 2009, 09:36am »

I wish I had your optimism.. mask rolleyes
User IP Logged

Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59  ...  100 Notify Send Topic Print
« Previous Topic | Next Topic »

Become a member of the UFO Casebook Forum today and join our more than 19,000 members.

Visit the UFO Casebook Web Site

Donate $6.99 for 50,000 Ad-Free Pageviews!

| |

This forum powered for FREE by Conforums ©
Sign up for your own Free Message Board today!
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Conforums Support | Parental Controls