hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1496 of 1496 FirstFirst ... 4969961396144614861493149414951496
Results 29,901 to 29,912 of 29912

Thread: Trump Keeps on #WINNING [USA Politics Thread]

  1. #29901
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,469
    Quote Originally Posted by teds :D View Post
    also 'go fuck your hat'

    just let that insult percolate for a while

    what a juicy, rich insult

    go fuck all the hats.
    Right? Magnificence in action right there...

  2. #29902
    evil edna's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    4,402
    kill the poor

  3. #29903
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I feel there's an implicit contract here. You can either pay for a product or service, or you can forego obtaining the product or service.

    If you want to claim you wouldn't have paid for it, then don't take it. When you've made every part of the purchasing decision besides the legal exchange step you are in essence accepting that the product or service has value to you, but you refuse to pay.

    Now, I'm pretty open to the idea that cultural artifacts deserve to be "free," but free as in accessible, not free as in beer. As long as the owner providing is the product and has a reasonable avenue of sale (which, to be honest, is like 99.9% of stuff that is pirated) there is no moral excuse for piracy.
    What about if I had zero intention of paying for the product because it was too expensive and/or I disliked the business model used, but would quite happily pirate it?

    (I'm devil's advocating here, but it is a consideration)
    So your position is that anything I find to be too expensive, but I still want, I should be able to simply take it, because......?

    Sounds legit.
    I'm not TAKING it, though, and this is where the argument becomes knotted. I'm not taking it, I'm not depriving the original owner of anything, nor am I depriving a potential purchaser from purchasing the product.

    Again, I'm playing devil's advocate here - if there is something I want and purchasing it is relatively straightforward, I will purchase it, or do without it.
    Yes you are, you are depriving the owner or creator of his property rights. The right to sell something exists for the creator or owner. This is pretty fundamental to society. By pirating, you are infringing on those rights. It's easy to lol, fuck big media corp, and not feel bad about, but people feel fuck all for illegally download some techno tune a dude made in his basement and worked his ass off to put up on beatport when that was a thing. And the play out with that stolen music for money.

    Don't be that guy. That guy is an asshole.

  4. #29904

    Join Date
    August 18, 2014
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I feel there's an implicit contract here. You can either pay for a product or service, or you can forego obtaining the product or service.

    If you want to claim you wouldn't have paid for it, then don't take it. When you've made every part of the purchasing decision besides the legal exchange step you are in essence accepting that the product or service has value to you, but you refuse to pay.

    Now, I'm pretty open to the idea that cultural artifacts deserve to be "free," but free as in accessible, not free as in beer. As long as the owner providing is the product and has a reasonable avenue of sale (which, to be honest, is like 99.9% of stuff that is pirated) there is no moral excuse for piracy.
    What about if I had zero intention of paying for the product because it was too expensive and/or I disliked the business model used, but would quite happily pirate it?

    (I'm devil's advocating here, but it is a consideration)
    So your position is that anything I find to be too expensive, but I still want, I should be able to simply take it, because......?

    Sounds legit.
    I'm not TAKING it, though, and this is where the argument becomes knotted. I'm not taking it, I'm not depriving the original owner of anything, nor am I depriving a potential purchaser from purchasing the product.

    Again, I'm playing devil's advocate here - if there is something I want and purchasing it is relatively straightforward, I will purchase it, or do without it.
    Yes you are, you are depriving the owner or creator of his property rights. The right to sell something exists for the creator or owner. This is pretty fundamental to society. By pirating, you are infringing on those rights. It's easy to lol, fuck big media corp, and not feel bad about, but people feel fuck all for illegally download some techno tune a dude made in his basement and worked his ass off to put up on beatport when that was a thing. And the play out with that stolen music for money.

    Don't be that guy. That guy is an asshole.
    Property rights are a prison guarded by the capitalist corporate oppressors.

  5. #29905
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Ego Proxy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Zekk Pacus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    I feel there's an implicit contract here. You can either pay for a product or service, or you can forego obtaining the product or service.

    If you want to claim you wouldn't have paid for it, then don't take it. When you've made every part of the purchasing decision besides the legal exchange step you are in essence accepting that the product or service has value to you, but you refuse to pay.

    Now, I'm pretty open to the idea that cultural artifacts deserve to be "free," but free as in accessible, not free as in beer. As long as the owner providing is the product and has a reasonable avenue of sale (which, to be honest, is like 99.9% of stuff that is pirated) there is no moral excuse for piracy.
    What about if I had zero intention of paying for the product because it was too expensive and/or I disliked the business model used, but would quite happily pirate it?

    (I'm devil's advocating here, but it is a consideration)
    So your position is that anything I find to be too expensive, but I still want, I should be able to simply take it, because......?

    Sounds legit.
    I'm not TAKING it, though, and this is where the argument becomes knotted. I'm not taking it, I'm not depriving the original owner of anything, nor am I depriving a potential purchaser from purchasing the product.

    Again, I'm playing devil's advocate here - if there is something I want and purchasing it is relatively straightforward, I will purchase it, or do without it.
    Yes you are, you are depriving the owner or creator of his property rights. The right to sell something exists for the creator or owner. This is pretty fundamental to society. By pirating, you are infringing on those rights. It's easy to lol, fuck big media corp, and not feel bad about, but people feel fuck all for illegally download some techno tune a dude made in his basement and worked his ass off to put up on beatport when that was a thing. And the play out with that stolen music for money.

    Don't be that guy. That guy is an asshole.
    Property rights are a prison guarded by the capitalist corporate oppressors.
    Have we built a system that's made more progress for people yet? That hasn't resulted in millions of dead peasants?
    meh

  6. #29906
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Location
    florida hick land
    Posts
    5,191
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Have we built a system that's made more progress for people yet? That hasn't resulted in millions of dead peasants?
    Don't think so, I mean the body count is pretty high in places like the Belgian Congo after all.

  7. #29907

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    6,972
    I'd argue the main reason for piracy, as proven by the popularity of subscription streaming services these days, is ease of access and in many cases ridiculous pricing for what is essentially throwaway entertainment. But i love how the people bitching the most about this are all American, meaning you have fuck all clue how it feels to use the Internet abroad apparently.

    Most people would gladly pay for their shit, but when you have to jump through a million hoops and have to pay idiotic prices (for example to import an album or whatever in an extreme case) they can fuck right off

    Yes there are people who would never pay, but as you love to point out with the theft thing, there are regular thieves too so...

    In before "you're not entitled to all the content" or "without it it wouldn't get made because licensing fees pay a part of it" in which case you can fuck right off tbfh. The Internet changed things, but not enough, they need to keep changing.
    Last edited by Isyel; March 30 2017 at 03:30:37 AM.

  8. #29908
    Frug's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,278
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Yes you are, you are depriving the owner or creator of his property rights. The right to sell something exists for the creator or owner.
    If you follow the line of discussion down to this point, the obvious rebuttal is that I would not have purchased something that is beyond my means (or within some definition of 'reasonable' means) to purchase, and thus I'm not depriving the creator of anything concrete. So I'm only denying him the right to deny it to me. I'm not depriving him of sales.

    Your silly hypothetical basement dude would have been well advised to sell it in a price range that doesn't prompt piracy.

    I'm not going to pay $60/month to get access to game of thrones despite loving it, because i'm not going to pay that stupid fucking amount. That's like flushing money, and that's about what it would cost me around here to obtain it legally.

    In seriousness I can see Aea's (and your) point, but I think it's unrealistic to generalize. At a certain price range you can fuck off, I'll get it some other way. Sorry we couldn't come to an agreement but I think you're detached from reality if you think I ought to feel somehow morally guilty for viewing it. I'm not the kind of drone you need to nerve staple, but I'm not going to refrain from viewing/listening to something I know I won't pay for because of morality preached to me by someone who doesn't see the problem.
    Last edited by Frug; March 30 2017 at 03:50:37 AM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loire
    I'm too stupid to say anything that deserves being in your magnificent signature.

  9. #29909

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    6,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Frug View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Yes you are, you are depriving the owner or creator of his property rights. The right to sell something exists for the creator or owner.
    If you follow the line of discussion down to this point, the obvious rebuttal is that I would not have purchased something that is beyond my means (or within some definition of 'reasonable' means) to purchase, and thus I'm not depriving the creator of anything concrete. So I'm only denying him the right to deny it to me. I'm not depriving him of sales.

    Your silly hypothetical basement dude would have been well advised to sell it in a price range that doesn't prompt piracy.

    I'm not going to pay $60/month to get access to game of thrones despite loving it, because i'm not going to pay that stupid fucking amount. That's like flushing money, and that's about what it would cost me around here to obtain it legally.

    In seriousness I can see Aea's (and your) point, but I think it's unrealistic to generalize. At a certain price range you can fuck off, I'll get it some other way. Sorry we couldn't come to an agreement but I think you're detached from reality if you think I ought to feel somehow morally guilty for viewing it. I'm not the kind of drone you need to nerve staple, but I'm not going to refrain from viewing/listening to something I know I won't pay for because of morality preached to me by someone who doesn't see the problem.
    Yeah you'd have a hard time convincing me 60 dollars for a couple hours worth of passive entertainment that most would only watch once and doesn't change at all for more entertainment later on is in any way shape or form reasonable.

    I think they're both just thinking of some hypothetical poor guy with a passion and little money, forgetting that poor guy also wouldn't fall into most of these categories and most would happily buy from him because he'd usually sell it for much more reasonable amounts and make it as easy as possible to get.

    Basement beats dude wouldn't be expecting me to buy his fucking 7 song album for 40usd, pay their country's sales tax, get it shipped for more money, then pay my own fucking import tax on top, taking weeks due to customs, just to have a bit of plastic that spins very fast for example. (aka fuck japan and their hatred of the internet)
    Last edited by Isyel; March 30 2017 at 04:02:38 AM.

  10. #29910
    Frug's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    I think they're both just thinking of some hypothetical poor guy with a passion and little money
    The problem with speaking in absolutes is that you then have to defend every extreme. If I'm never supposed to pirate because it's always wrong, then it doesn't matter what situation I come up with, they have to defend it.

    It also tends to break down when one factors in that I donate money to content creators I like on a regular basis because I want to contribute. Either by purchasing affordable subscriptions or by donating. But when the price point reaches a certain level I flip over and refuse to pay. But oh lordy, I'm some kind of theif. Society is crumbling because of me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loire
    I'm too stupid to say anything that deserves being in your magnificent signature.

  11. #29911

    Join Date
    April 9, 2012
    Location
    Pit of depravity
    Posts
    4,899
    Fuck the movie/TV (probably music too, but i dont listen to much so have no direct experience)industry with a stick. Raise prioces to the point of utter idiocy, and people will find other ways of getting your shit that they can afford. Pretty simple.

    Is it right/wrong? Don't really care. It is however obvious, but they simply dont learn quickly.

  12. #29912
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    5,720
    The problem with piracy (or the awesome part about ) is that sales have never been better. The people who can, pay for the convenience, and the ones who pirate, either end up buying some or paying for it in the end or greatly enhancing the cultural value of the product creating a runaway effect that increases audiences and sales.

    Same with films, productivity software etc. Would never have gotten into my career without first pirating software for enough time to learn it.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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