4 ms·

"Ethical/lawful or not I don't care" -me_me_me Parody? I'm not sure. Seems like an attitude I'm relatively happy isn't super common in society. If I make a b

by codyb 6y ago

"Ethical/lawful or not I don't care" -me_me_me Parody? I'm not sure. Seems like an attitude I'm relatively happy isn't super common in society. If I make a book, I don't "owe you an effort" just cause you don't want to make it available in a format you'd like to consume. And that doesn't give you the right to steal it from me. Now certainly everyone should live under a set of guidelines, no one should be certain efforts that do need to be made, say for accessibility reasons, and we do that as a society for a common good. But if you want to use Betamax and it's going to be expensive for me to support it, I don't owe you that. And it doesn't make it okay for you to just take my work because you will only use your own format. Edit: Also... small creators things get stolen constantly on the internet. It's a big problem for a lot of content creators and probably discourages people from making more art.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
fossuser 6y ago
The OPs argument is bad/stupid, but there is a real argument to be made here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26028392 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26028392
- me_me_me 6y ago
  Your comment is bad/stupid. You are bringing nothing to this discussion.
  - fossuser 6y ago
    I regret saying stupid, too abrasive and I didn't intend it as a personal attack. My comment links to my actual argument.
    - me_me_me 6y ago
      That's fine. But its a hijack of a thread. I admitted my reasoning is not moralistically ethical or law abiding. My argument is that piracy is there for a reason. There was a huge dip in torrent usage at the dawn of Netflix, for a reason. The convenience of Netflix outweighed 'cost' of piracy. Now piracy is back up, why? Thats the reality of the world we are living in. The argument you linked is great and it makes sense. And shows issues with copyright etc. that is my long time belief. But the reality is that I pirate things when its more convenient to me. As a lot of people too. Saying otherwise is lying. And arguing how CP is bad and damaging doesn't change anything, because disney and company will uphold it no matter what.
      - fossuser 6y ago
        Yeah I understand where you're coming from, I just find that argument doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. For example, if instead of piracy we were talking about stealing from a brick and mortar store it wouldn't be right to do it just because it's possible and easy to get away with it (or because the store didn't provide convenient service, etc.). File sharing is different for lots of reasons (digital goods are non-rival, the issue with copyright I mention in my comment) and it's those reasons that make the argument compelling (basically that modern copyright law is itself bad). I think just saying it's okay because you don't care about corporate profit actually weakens the ability to persuade people with the underlying arguments which I think are good and I don't think it's an ethical position that really holds up. Thoughtful people that see only those arguments (or worse 'information wants to be free') come away with a stronger defense of existing copyright law. I do think that companies should take it into account for pragmatic reasons and recognize that it's the real competition to not delivering high quality convenient service, but that's largely because it's not possible to enforce actual copyright law with the internet at scale - which is somewhat of a different issue. I don't think it's really hi-jacking the thread because I think the issue is so tightly coupled. I just didn't want to copy/paste my comment because that seemed like bad etiquette?
        me_me_me 6y ago
        > For example, if instead of piracy we were talking about stealing from a brick and mortar store But we are not. That's shifting goalposts fallacy. What about buying used DVD is that piracy? After all two parties watch a movie but movie maker made one sale? > I think just saying it's okay because you don't care about corporate profit actually weakens the ability to persuade people with the underlying arguments which I think are good and I don't think it's an ethical position that really holds up. Thoughtful people that see only those arguments (or worse 'information wants to be free') come away with a stronger defense of existing copyright law. That is why the very first line I am admitting that my position is out of pure lazyness calculation. > I do think that companies should take it into account for pragmatic reasons and recognize that it's the real competition to not delivering high quality convenient service, but that's largely because it's not possible to enforce actual copyright law with the internet at scale - which is somewhat of a different issue. I am of belief that piracy is great equalizer. A force that curbs infinite appetite of corporate overlord that would bleed us dry if they could. It makes particularly movie industry more customer friendly and more competitive. > I don't think it's really hi-jacking the thread because I think the issue is so tightly coupled. I just didn't want to copy/paste my comment because that seemed like bad etiquette? Actually it was hi-jacking. Imagine two people talk and you overhead them you cut in. Completely disregarding the actual discussion and drop your opinion in without addressing what was previously said. Sure you could have dropped in that, but at least address why you think that is better argument and why you disagree with previous post. That is called a discussion and not stating your opinion. Hope that it make sense.
me_me_me 6y ago
> If I make a book, I don't "owe you an effort" just cause you don't want to make it available in a format you'd like to consume. Of course you don't. > And that doesn't give you the right to steal it from me. First of all I am not stealing, you haven't lost anything. Secondly you not making effort to distribute your book means you don't care too much about selling your book now do you? Anyhow, that's comparing apples to oranges. I support indie devs/book writers/music because I directly support the creator(s). This whole situation is bit different when we are talking about pirating a movie that made $1b in profits. > But if you want to use Betamax and it's going to be expensive for me to support it, I don't owe you that. And it doesn't make it okay for you to just take my work because you will only use your own format. But that completely not my argument. I want to have an easy access to what you make. If you only sell your book after I install an ad plugin into my browser then fuck you. If i care about reading it I will pirate. This is a case of an author actively working against access to the product for no reason. And the author is a multinational corporation raking in profits.
- bosie 6y ago
  > First of all I am not stealing, you haven't lost anything. So in the future when he provides you with the format you pirated you will purchase it? Despite having pirated it before?
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    Yeah, well I have done similar thing. I bought a games that I pirated in the past. I am not saying piracy is great everyone should be doing it. My argument is: I am sometimes lazy and tired after a long day. I want to watch a movie i heard was good. I can spend 15 mins trying to figure out where to watch it or I can pirate it after it doesnt come up in netflix search. but i am not going to pay for 10 subscriptions just soo I can occasionally watch a show.
    - realityking 6y ago
      > I can spend 15 mins trying to figure out where to watch it or I can pirate it after it doesnt come up in netflix search. Almost any movie you care about will be available on iTunes and/or Amazon Video to rent or buy. Do you check those too or is that too much work? Ultimately, your attitude comes off as entitled. If everything you w Any to consume isn’t available as part of one convince the subscription you rather pirate it. That devalues creation. It’s unreasonable to expect all TV and movies ever created to be available for $20/month.
mixmastamyk 6y ago
(Copyright inf. is not stealing, it is another lesser thing.) But yes, if you think you can keep things off the internet just because you said so, you've signed up for a hopeless battle. It is up to IP holders to make good choices regarding making their content available conveniently at a fair price. If not, they've made their bed and have to lie in it.

by codyb 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

fossuser 6y ago

The OPs argument is bad/stupid, but there is a real argument to be made here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26028392 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26028392

me_me_me 6y ago
Your comment is bad/stupid. You are bringing nothing to this discussion.
- fossuser 6y ago
  I regret saying stupid, too abrasive and I didn't intend it as a personal attack. My comment links to my actual argument.
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    That's fine. But its a hijack of a thread. I admitted my reasoning is not moralistically ethical or law abiding. My argument is that piracy is there for a reason. There was a huge dip in torrent usage at the dawn of Netflix, for a reason. The convenience of Netflix outweighed 'cost' of piracy. Now piracy is back up, why? Thats the reality of the world we are living in. The argument you linked is great and it makes sense. And shows issues with copyright etc. that is my long time belief. But the reality is that I pirate things when its more convenient to me. As a lot of people too. Saying otherwise is lying. And arguing how CP is bad and damaging doesn't change anything, because disney and company will uphold it no matter what.
    - fossuser 6y ago
      Yeah I understand where you're coming from, I just find that argument doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. For example, if instead of piracy we were talking about stealing from a brick and mortar store it wouldn't be right to do it just because it's possible and easy to get away with it (or because the store didn't provide convenient service, etc.). File sharing is different for lots of reasons (digital goods are non-rival, the issue with copyright I mention in my comment) and it's those reasons that make the argument compelling (basically that modern copyright law is itself bad). I think just saying it's okay because you don't care about corporate profit actually weakens the ability to persuade people with the underlying arguments which I think are good and I don't think it's an ethical position that really holds up. Thoughtful people that see only those arguments (or worse 'information wants to be free') come away with a stronger defense of existing copyright law. I do think that companies should take it into account for pragmatic reasons and recognize that it's the real competition to not delivering high quality convenient service, but that's largely because it's not possible to enforce actual copyright law with the internet at scale - which is somewhat of a different issue. I don't think it's really hi-jacking the thread because I think the issue is so tightly coupled. I just didn't want to copy/paste my comment because that seemed like bad etiquette?
      - me_me_me 6y ago
        > For example, if instead of piracy we were talking about stealing from a brick and mortar store But we are not. That's shifting goalposts fallacy. What about buying used DVD is that piracy? After all two parties watch a movie but movie maker made one sale? > I think just saying it's okay because you don't care about corporate profit actually weakens the ability to persuade people with the underlying arguments which I think are good and I don't think it's an ethical position that really holds up. Thoughtful people that see only those arguments (or worse 'information wants to be free') come away with a stronger defense of existing copyright law. That is why the very first line I am admitting that my position is out of pure lazyness calculation. > I do think that companies should take it into account for pragmatic reasons and recognize that it's the real competition to not delivering high quality convenient service, but that's largely because it's not possible to enforce actual copyright law with the internet at scale - which is somewhat of a different issue. I am of belief that piracy is great equalizer. A force that curbs infinite appetite of corporate overlord that would bleed us dry if they could. It makes particularly movie industry more customer friendly and more competitive. > I don't think it's really hi-jacking the thread because I think the issue is so tightly coupled. I just didn't want to copy/paste my comment because that seemed like bad etiquette? Actually it was hi-jacking. Imagine two people talk and you overhead them you cut in. Completely disregarding the actual discussion and drop your opinion in without addressing what was previously said. Sure you could have dropped in that, but at least address why you think that is better argument and why you disagree with previous post. That is called a discussion and not stating your opinion. Hope that it make sense.

me_me_me 6y ago

> If I make a book, I don't "owe you an effort" just cause you don't want to make it available in a format you'd like to consume. Of course you don't. > And that doesn't give you the right to steal it from me. First of all I am not stealing, you haven't lost anything. Secondly you not making effort to distribute your book means you don't care too much about selling your book now do you? Anyhow, that's comparing apples to oranges. I support indie devs/book writers/music because I directly support the creator(s). This whole situation is bit different when we are talking about pirating a movie that made $1b in profits. > But if you want to use Betamax and it's going to be expensive for me to support it, I don't owe you that. And it doesn't make it okay for you to just take my work because you will only use your own format. But that completely not my argument. I want to have an easy access to what you make. If you only sell your book after I install an ad plugin into my browser then fuck you. If i care about reading it I will pirate. This is a case of an author actively working against access to the product for no reason. And the author is a multinational corporation raking in profits.

bosie 6y ago
> First of all I am not stealing, you haven't lost anything. So in the future when he provides you with the format you pirated you will purchase it? Despite having pirated it before?
- me_me_me 6y ago
  Yeah, well I have done similar thing. I bought a games that I pirated in the past. I am not saying piracy is great everyone should be doing it. My argument is: I am sometimes lazy and tired after a long day. I want to watch a movie i heard was good. I can spend 15 mins trying to figure out where to watch it or I can pirate it after it doesnt come up in netflix search. but i am not going to pay for 10 subscriptions just soo I can occasionally watch a show.
  - realityking 6y ago
    > I can spend 15 mins trying to figure out where to watch it or I can pirate it after it doesnt come up in netflix search. Almost any movie you care about will be available on iTunes and/or Amazon Video to rent or buy. Do you check those too or is that too much work? Ultimately, your attitude comes off as entitled. If everything you w Any to consume isn’t available as part of one convince the subscription you rather pirate it. That devalues creation. It’s unreasonable to expect all TV and movies ever created to be available for $20/month.

mixmastamyk 6y ago

(Copyright inf. is not stealing, it is another lesser thing.) But yes, if you think you can keep things off the internet just because you said so, you've signed up for a hopeless battle. It is up to IP holders to make good choices regarding making their content available conveniently at a fair price. If not, they've made their bed and have to lie in it.