View Poll Results: What to do about the 'Is Shaolin-Do for real?' thread

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Merge all S-D threads together so it clears 1000 posts!

    22 38.60%
  • Unlock IS-Dfr. Let all the S-D threads stand independently.

    13 22.81%
  • Keep IS-Dfr locked down. All IS-Dfr posters deserved to be punished.

    5 8.77%
  • Delete them all. Let Yama sort them out.

    17 29.82%
Page 971 of 1335 FirstFirst ... 47187192196196997097197297398110211071 ... LastLast
Results 14,551 to 14,565 of 20011

Thread: Is Shaolin-Do for real?

  1. #14551
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Noob View Post
    100% agreement here.

    I started SD because my teacher was the best martial artist I saw in the area where I was looking for schools. While I wasn't necessarily looking for lineage legitimacy, I was disappointed when I found out that there was so much dishonesty as to the origins of some of the material in the system. Still, after some soul-searching, I've stayed because: 1) I didn't start for lineage legitimacy in the first place; 2) my sifu is still the best MA in the area and one of the best that I've seen period; 3) my qwoon doesn't have any marshmallows in it - we work and condition hard; 5) I find that the techniques are usable; and 6) the form volume, while ensuring that I'll never get really good at any of them, provide me with enough variation that I don't get bored practicing the techniques in a series of 8 or 9 forms.

    I would like to know the real history of the system. I'd like total honesty from the old guard. I'd also like congress to be functional rather than disfunctional, but I'm not going to move out of the U.S.
    So you have seen your sifu fight people from other schools or MA's? Or are you judging him one of the best you have ever seen based on solo performance and indoctrination?

    Martial arts are fighting styles first. If you can't fight with it, it's just art. And nobody can say their MA is deadly until they have seen it in real action on MANY occasions against a VARIETY of opponents. Not many MA teachers can say they are great fighters. Maybe 0.001%, and that is being generous. Sure they can beat up newbies and semi-retarded thugs, but that isn't saying much.

    For the record, for the right price, todays Shaolin monastery will endorse anyone. It's false, fake, bullsh1t. The real monks were killed a long time ago. The ones who survived kept the art going thru family styles which ultimately end up in the hands of guys like HSK, not Sin The.

    My point is that finding a good sifu is a huge crapshoot and lineage is the only evidence you have at hand to try to see if a style is worth it's salt. By no means does lineage guarantee a good fighting style, but a fake lineage pretty much guarantees it is garbage.
    A sifu with poor integrity cannot create a sifu with great integrity, just can't be done. If the student does end up being a stand up guy, it came from somewhere else.

  2. #14552
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Permanent state of Denial
    Posts
    2,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post
    There is nothing in the law that says you cannot play anothers music, NOTHING. It says you cannot PROFIT off other peoples IP. Do you understand the difference? If so, why do you keep mixing the two?
    I'm telling you that IP doesn't exist, man. You cannot own ideas. If you're talking about a recording of a specific historical instance of music (an mp3) or a specific sequence of words, then you're falling back into the issue of using the government (a legal code of 3rd party aggression) to stop other people from distributing historical instances of music and specific sequences of words that they possess (assuming they've purchased a CD or know a song. I'm telling you that you cannot own those things, and there is no difference between humming a tune, singing it to yourself, and copying mp3s (or downloading them). You can only own the Cd's before you distribute them to consumers and the MP3's that you distribute to businesses like Itunes at the moment of making a contract. After that, you don't own anything. If I purchase a CD, it doesn't matter what the government says. I'm free to distribute MY property any way that I desire. It hurts nobody, and the government's position on this is dead-wrong because it is irrational.

    To say that copying hurts the musician is false. It doesn't hurt him in the least. I don't try to stop him from selling his mp3's and CD's. He tries to stop me from distributing MY property, which I purchased FROM HIM in a reciprocal exchange (giving up money). Note that Sanyo doesn't track me down when I sell my TV on Craigslist. I profit by selling their product. I profit from my TV because I relinquish my property and ownership of a scarce resource. Music doesn't change anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post
    Nobody is saying that it isn't hard to bring the old world into the new developing world we see today. It is a monumental task and now with the internet we have engaged in the largest experiment in chaos in human history. This illuminates major problems that need to be solved. But in todays world property rights means something.
    Okay, but this doesn't change the fact that it shouldn't mean anything, and that no rational argument could ever defend IP without self-contradiction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post
    So do you wanna just fall back into bartering and share everything? I think that would be pretty sweet, but it isn't gonna happen and we need to face what is ahead of us rather than try to emulate what is behind us.
    Share? No. I'm no socialist. I'm a property-rights man. You see, I don't think a musician owns any part of my CD once I purchase it. I don't care if he claims that a ghost (his ideas) live in my CD. I purchase a property right, not a "sometimes" property right in my CD. Once I own it, I own it entirely. No musician or studio should be able to claim a property in what I purchased. I didn't rent the CD. I bought it for good, and I should be able to resell that property just like I sell an old home, a used car, or an old TV.



    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post
    How is my ownership of my own ideas a government monopoly? Riddle me this?
    Who's going to enforce your right to exclusive ownership of your ideas, which you turned around and sold (as property) to other individuals in exchange for money?
    The government, of course, at the business end of IP law.
    Last edited by Shaolin Wookie; 09-06-2012 at 06:51 PM.

  3. #14553
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Permanent state of Denial
    Posts
    2,272
    The great irony of patents and IP is that the Federal govt. calls "file sharing" a form of piracy. It's nothing of the sort. In fact, internet file sharing is identical to a Swap Meet. You give up certain things in exchange for others. There's no more piracy in file sharing than there is in trading baseball cards. You must pay for access to certain websites; you pay for access to file sharing by contributing your media as a form of payment. "Money" is a medium of exchange, and digital media serves as that medium in file sharing scenarios. The governmetn won't recognize this argument as legally valid, since the government has a monopoly on money in the United States, and it believes that it can can set the value ("definition") of money by fiat. It even creates money out of thin air and says that it must retain its value independent of an increase in the money supply. Inflation results, but the government doesn't call what it does "inflation" (it was last called "quanitative easing") and hence the legal system will not uphold any argument that criticizes the monopoly's definitions of money.

    One of hte earliest uses of "patents" was a temporary grant of government monopoly to ship captains, enabling them to loot and pillage the ships of rival countries.

    There's nothing economic or rationally defendable about "patents" and IP. They're strictly govt. edicts, nothing more. Those who hold IP above our heads are the pirates. We're the prey.

    If you think that we should just cope with laws as they exist in our flawed world, and not expect rationality in legal matters, then why not simply surrender ourselves up as slaves, selling our property in ourselves to irrational govt. edicts? The answer is simple: we respect property rights because they are the basis of freedom, and freedom is congereric with rationality.

    Irrationality is a bane to freedom, and hence IP reigns in the US today, where irrationality seems to be the norm.
    Last edited by Shaolin Wookie; 09-06-2012 at 06:56 PM.

  4. #14554
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Skid Row Adjacent
    Posts
    2,391
    Libertarian ideology in defense of some fraudulent ass martial arts is a circus act I can appreciate.



    *I just noticed that Ludwig Von MiSinThe here is wearing a fanny pack.
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown View Post
    This is not a veiled request for compliments

    The short story is I did 325# for one set of 1 rep.

    1) Does this sound gifted, or just lucky?

  5. #14555
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie View Post
    Songs should not have government protection. Many of hte artists I listen to encourage free sharing via the internet, since many of them network that way to find new listeners. I know several aspiring hip-hop artists who regularly upload music to torrent sites in order to network their songs. They don't make a dime off of their music. What you have in corporate IP law (Crony Capitalism at its worse--"Crapitalism") is a rejection of free market economics. Corporate recording studios use the government in order to keep all the profits to themselves, and to shut out competition.

    This recently was a debacle for the 80's band Def Leppard. Their recording studio retained the rights to all of their original recordings. For fear of losing profits by going digitial with Itunes, etc., the studio refused to allow the old recordings to be distributed by online sellers in mp3 format. Def Leppard thought that this was retarded, and so they re-recorded all of their songs this year, taking care to sound exactly like their old recordings, and then distributed the new recordings online.

    This is the insanity of IP.

    When musicians and studios whine about IP, they are trying to wring every last dollar from a temporary grant of government monopoly simply b/c America's IP laws are so antiquated and irrational as to allow such practices to remain legal, when clearly patents/IP ought not to be.

    Govt. monopoly is not rationally defendable, and it ought to be destroyed ASAP. Is it likely to happen? Not sure. But if Universal Healthcare (Govt. monopoly on health insurance) is a sign of anything, it's not likely to happen anytime soon.
    I'm the last person you want to have this argument with.

    I am a musician, I have sold music and I have given music away. I have professional releases, not under my name, but my name is in the credits of course. I'm a producer, I make music. When I started my opinion was that an aspiring musician should give it away and consider themselves lucky if people want to hear it. But that was for promo purposes. I was making a name for myself and was in no position to make demands. It turns out that I still do a ton of work for free because it is just fun for me, I actually have a good paying day job and have no desire to be a music star. I'm happy with my local status and the respect I get from those who know me and my work. But if I had decided to make a living off it I would have had to change that. And I have put a ton of thought into it.

    OK, my personal opinion is that recordings should be for promo use only and the money should come from performance. That being said, I still believe you should be able to own your work. Only I can perform MY songs unless I give permission, for money that is. You can do whatever you want with the song privately.

    The reason why recordings in the last 80 years have been worth money is because it cost a ton of cash to record. Today this is not the case. With 10 grand I can buy all the gear I need to make a pro LP, no sweat. A digirack and a nice G5 with good mics and the knowledge it takes to do all this is all that is needed. 30 years ago a band was advanced tens of thousands to produce an LP and that is why the recordings were worth so much, but the ownership of masters hasn't changed at all. If you wrote the song, it's yours(unless you are selling yourself).

    The reason why Mozart didn't make money off recordings is rather obvious, but he did make money off shows. And in todays world he would own his masters. Plain and simple.


    If I had a dollar for every lo-fi hiphop backpack twaattt giving away music I would be rich. If they had quality, they would graduate to selling their services. Those who have less talent have to give it away if they want to be heard, it isn't some kind of moral decision, they don't have a choice cause nobody would pay for their novice crap. Plain and simple...

    As far as def leopard is concerned... they didn't have to sign the contract, but they were young stupid and wanted to be rock stars. They own their songs but not the masters that the contract says the company paid for and keeps. So they had to re-record and if it wasn't for the fact that they own the songs, they couldn't have even done that. It was their IP ownership that allowed them to re record the songs.

    Smart bands do not give up all rights to masters, idiots with big dreams and naive understanding of the biz do that. Especially today, more and more bands are learning that owning their work is much better than taking an advance from a major label.
    Last edited by Syn7; 09-06-2012 at 08:21 PM.

  6. #14556
    Quote Originally Posted by Empty_Cup View Post
    It's ironic that hsk is in essence accusing Jake of the exact same thing GMT did, i.e. "stealing material." I think if hsk was to try and prove the 5 Animal Form is some sort of intellectual property that Jake stole, he'd have no grounds.

    There could always be agreement that Jake sucks at the form, but I don't think he say he "stole" anything.

    Lawyers, thoughts?
    Yeah, my thoughts are that Sin The is a hypocrite as$hole that accuses others of doing exactly what he has done. the man is a waste of space as far as MA's are concerned. And given his actions, most likely not a good man all around. Good men don't lie and steal, plain and simple.

  7. #14557
    Quote Originally Posted by Drake View Post
    Or, what was that one.... "Tiger plays with the ball"?
    No no, it is "snake creaps from two rocks" which leads to the awesome move of "snake finds honey hole"

  8. #14558
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie View Post
    The great irony of patents and IP is that the Federal govt. calls "file sharing" a form of piracy. It's nothing of the sort. In fact, internet file sharing is identical to a Swap Meet. You give up certain things in exchange for others. There's no more piracy in file sharing than there is in trading baseball cards. You must pay for access to certain websites; you pay for access to file sharing by contributing your media as a form of payment. "Money" is a medium of exchange, and digital media serves as that medium in file sharing scenarios. The governmetn won't recognize this argument as legally valid, since the government has a monopoly on money in the United States, and it believes that it can can set the value ("definition") of money by fiat. It even creates money out of thin air and says that it must retain its value independent of an increase in the money supply. Inflation results, but the government doesn't call what it does "inflation" (it was last called "quanitative easing") and hence the legal system will not uphold any argument that criticizes the monopoly's definitions of money.

    One of hte earliest uses of "patents" was a temporary grant of government monopoly to ship captains, enabling them to loot and pillage the ships of rival countries.

    There's nothing economic or rationally defendable about "patents" and IP. They're strictly govt. edicts, nothing more. Those who hold IP above our heads are the pirates. We're the prey.

    If you think that we should just cope with laws as they exist in our flawed world, and not expect rationality in legal matters, then why not simply surrender ourselves up as slaves, selling our property in ourselves to irrational govt. edicts? The answer is simple: we respect property rights because they are the basis of freedom, and freedom is congereric with rationality.

    Irrationality is a bane to freedom, and hence IP reigns in the US today, where irrationality seems to be the norm.
    Man, I have so much to say about this. Maybe it is better suited for the off topic section. I don't wanna take away from HSK's gripe. If you start a thread and paste the last responses I will pick it up there, ok. But not here. I'm only gonna talk about it as it pertains to the topic of the thread from now on. Sorry HSK, I wasn't tryna derail ya.

  9. #14559
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Skid Row Adjacent
    Posts
    2,391
    Quote Originally Posted by hskwarrior View Post
    i really don't like this guy. i really don't.
    I'm not sure what to think about his use of the ending of Bloodsport as an allegory. . .





    "'Mr Dukes, you fought with inspiriation"

    And so my friends out there watching remember that kung fu and life <pauses, looks off camera at cue card> doesn't have to be a bloodsport."

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R. Brown View Post
    This is not a veiled request for compliments

    The short story is I did 325# for one set of 1 rep.

    1) Does this sound gifted, or just lucky?

  10. #14560
    Quote Originally Posted by hskwarrior View Post
    i'm done talking about this fool. i'm making my first video blog on this form to set the story straight.

    carry ob gentleman....carry on
    Nah, I'm more interested in your video response to jake. I wanna see how long it takes to bait this kid. He's at the fake high road stage. The next stage is "I couldn't be bothered to respond" but worry not my friend, the stage after that is pure comedy!!! Keep manipulatin'...

  11. #14561
    Quote Originally Posted by hskwarrior View Post
    you know i'm gonna do it. and did you see that fantasy sh1t he said???
    Yeah he's a d0rk. No question. I thik he actually believes he's in a higher state. Of course he would deny this, but his speach made it quite clear. He thinks he's the man. lol Priceless sh1t.

    Take your time, keep it hillarious.

  12. #14562
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    CA, USA
    Posts
    4,899
    Quote Originally Posted by hskwarrior View Post
    i really don't like this guy. i really don't.
    I tried to watch this the whole way through but couldn't. He could have at least kept his cue cards closer to the camera. After the first five times I was too distracted by his looking off to the side, and it made his message come across as weak. Or rather, weakER.
    Last edited by Jimbo; 09-07-2012 at 07:41 AM.

  13. #14563

    Fair Points/Questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post
    So you have seen your sifu fight people from other schools or MA's? Or are you judging him one of the best you have ever seen based on solo performance and indoctrination?

    Martial arts are fighting styles first. If you can't fight with it, it's just art. And nobody can say their MA is deadly until they have seen it in real action on MANY occasions against a VARIETY of opponents. Not many MA teachers can say they are great fighters. Maybe 0.001%, and that is being generous. Sure they can beat up newbies and semi-retarded thugs, but that isn't saying much.

    For the record, for the right price, todays Shaolin monastery will endorse anyone. It's false, fake, bullsh1t. The real monks were killed a long time ago. The ones who survived kept the art going thru family styles which ultimately end up in the hands of guys like HSK, not Sin The.

    My point is that finding a good sifu is a huge crapshoot and lineage is the only evidence you have at hand to try to see if a style is worth it's salt. By no means does lineage guarantee a good fighting style, but a fake lineage pretty much guarantees it is garbage.
    A sifu with poor integrity cannot create a sifu with great integrity, just can't be done. If the student does end up being a stand up guy, it came from somewhere else.
    Fair points and questions but don't mischaracterize what I said. I didn't say that my teacher was deadly or that I was. I said he was the best martial artist I saw in my search and one of the best that I've seen. I also said that I found that the techniques work, not that they're deadly - of course I've not seen anyone killed with them.

    My clarifications notwithstanding, your questions are still fair. I'm the first person to admit that I'm not the most experienced martial artist. I've boxed some, wrestled for years, took longfist for about a year and a half from a very respected teacher in high school and then didn't do martial arts again, with the exception of Army combatives, until I got divorced over a decade later. That's when I took up SD; that was about 4 and a half years ago. I have not seen my teacher in anything approaching a real fight. I'll say this though. My opinion is based on me comparing him to other martial artists I've trained with and met in the past and the present. While my teacher doesn't mix it up much with other styles, I, like JP used to do, touch hands with folks from other styles when I'm given the opportunity. Despite the fact that I outweigh my sifu by more than 50 pounds, he gives me more trouble than anyone else I mix it up with; with the one exception being a western martial artist who's been training since he was 13 in one thing or another. That's how I arrive at my opinion of his quality as a practitioner and on the usefulness of the system as a fighting system. I'll continue to develop that opinion as my experiences broaden. I'm starting judo this month, which I know is 180 degrees from CMA (that's why I'm adding it). But we'll see if my opinion of my Sifu as a martial artist will change. I think its unlikely.

  14. #14564

    Publicity

    Quote Originally Posted by hskwarrior View Post
    theres one thing better than clowning the clown jake mace.

    TITTY SPRINKLES!





    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZbK2JQ_cR4
    I wonder how many more views Jake is getting on youtube thanks to the publicity you're giving him.

  15. #14565
    No. If you can figure out the formula for Coca Cola, you are free to sell the identical drink. Coke does not have a patent on the formula and cannot stop you from selling the product. They have a trade secret and they could only stop you if you illegally acquired the formula, for example by paying an employee to steal it. However, Coke does have a trademark on the words Coke and Coca Cola, so you cannot call your product Coke or Coca Cola, but you can sell the same product and call it whatever you want and you cannot be stopped.

    The same is true of martial arts. There is no IP protection for ancient techniques. It is not theft or stealing to copy them. Sorry to those whose feelings are now hurt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie View Post
    Correct. Trade secrets are IP (not in a monopolistic sense), but they are "discoverable" by others. Again, if someone stumbled upon Coke's formula and then sold an identical product called Coka, or something, then there is no problem. The only problem that arises, from a rational-legal persepctive, is if someone discovers the formula--or something close to it--and then tries to sell you Coka as geniune "Coke." But again--that's not Coke's problem (it was in the past, however, since many people tried to defraud the public with false Coke products). It's the consumer's problem, and the consumer has the right to sue for fraud.

    Now, the patent does give the patent-owner the power of aggression where no harm is leveraged in exchange. For instance, if I manage to figure out Coke's formula by playing around with flavors, then Coke retains the power to prevent me from using my goods (my flavors and my formula) for profit. I did nothing to harm them. Coke thereby obtains a property in mind, my memories, and in my physical resources. If I try to compete with Coke, then the government will shut me down by force, even though I did not threaten to harm Coke. Again--reduction of profits in the form of competition is not a form of aggression.

    The patent is the medium of aggression. Government is the agent of aggression.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •