There is a natural order to this world, and those who try to upend it do not fare well.

What are you referring to exactly?

That was a Cloud Atlas reference :)

I am going to be disillusioned with HN if this uninformed speculation isn't buried.

So you conclude the patent system and the legal structure is fine as it is? Because, my conclusion is the opposite from all the points I make above.

False dichotomy alert: the patent system may be broken in ways other than your speculation.

I don't think bribes were involved, for instance.

Also, it's wise not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence. This jury was obviously incompetent and manipulated (even if not deliberately) by a foreman with his own agenda.

Another one a good friend once taught me: when you think you have figured out something nobody else did, odds are you're wrong. He used lines on a bank as an example: if there are two lines and one is much smaller than the other, they are probably not interchangeable and, if you enter the short one, you may realize you entered the wrong one.

>The patent system may be broken in ways other than your speculation.

I claim that the patent system is broken because it allows anyone to patent BS trivial stuff, which can later be used to sue their competitors.

I would love to hear your version of 'the ways other than your(my) speculation'

I don't disagree with this specific point, but you made a lot of other points in your post.

I also suggest you are coming across as somewhat aggressive. We can disagree in less emotional ways, even if it is an emotional issue for most of us.

>I also suggest you are coming across as somewhat aggressive.

It is true, even when I read my own comment now, I do find it a bit aggressive. I'm genuinely sorry for that...actually I was kind of taken aback after reading that Jury's reasoning...and used the same spirit to type that comment...Nothing is fair in this world..

No, but the part about bribery is pure speculation. I am also shocked to find this at the top spot.

So much money is in the play that bribery should be assumed by default until proven beyond reasonable dubt otherwise.

And logically you could extend that to ridiculous extremes. Assuming anything by default is a sign of a weak argument.

In my feeling assuming that there were no bribes in $1bn trial is already ridiculous extreme of rule: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

I'm always reminded of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," and rants like this spinning conspiracy tales never meet that standard.

Why did you let the reddit community turn to shit?

What's your name in GoonWaffe?

I don't play anymore, but my username was SpiderWebMayhem.

What made you stop?

Time.

For me, I found myself spending far too much time worrying about my product inventory or how to optimize my logistics chain to squeeze a few more percentage points out of my margin.

Basically, I realized I could be doing the same thing but making real-money instead of space-money. I never really enjoyed the combat part of EVE (it kinda sucks), so when I realized that I was basically playing at business...why not start building real businesses?

It's an awesome game that I'd totally get back into...once I'm financially secure and playing EVE from a yacht.

> Basically, I realized I could be doing the same thing but making real-money instead of space-money.

That line sums up EVE for a good number of bittervets, I'd imagine. It's the reason why I don't want to sign up again, not until I'm on a yacht (as you put it). Also wassup goon buddy.

This is matches perfectly for why I stopped playing as well.

No it's not.

(See what I did there? I responded to an unsupported statement of fact with another unsupported statement of fact. Both our arguments are equally valid, i.e. not at all. Perhaps next time you post on HN you could add some arguments to support your position, if only out of courtesy to those of us who cannot read your mind to see the no doubt infallible logic behind your opinion.)

I voted in favour of your response, because the sort of snark that you presented resonates with me, however, two things:

1. This kind of response (along with the kind that I am giving now) is often just as much a problem as the initial non-useful post in terms of "useless thread clutter". Things could go either way on whether it's really useful to point out the situation to a user "for their benefit" -- the voting system exists partly to let us wash unproductive responses out of sight.

2. You particularly noted "next time you post on HN", and that made me feel a bit sick. There's little more elitist than saying to a newbie that they need to change their behaviour "around here", or "to hang out with us". It shows a greater concern for our little clique than for the ideal of argumentation, or for the dissemination of knowledge to people who could use it.

All that said, I'm clearly not following my own advice here -- in my defense, I'm making the bet based on your post that you're someone willing to consider your actions and either respectfully disagree or change, but I could be wrong. My response likely ought to be voted down as further useless junk.

That being said, there is value to posts like the above. If we want to avoid becoming Reddit, we must self moderate and make an effort to stabilize our culture.

Thanks this is something that always bothered me as well.