6 ms·

The level of mental gymnastics I'm seeing to deny this claim is astounding. Of course it's piracy, piracy is okay! It's interesting to see this touch a nerve so

The level of mental gymnastics I'm seeing to deny this claim is astounding. Of course it's piracy, piracy is okay! It's interesting to see this touch a nerve so intensely, I think it's really exposing the lies people tell themselves to cope with a reality that isn't really internally consistent and that's why there's such a strong reaction. Piracy is taking shit that doesn't "belong" to you but also doesn't cost anything to duplicate. It's a silly concept that shouldn't exist and only does so because we have a broken intellectual property system (though other broken systems contribute). That being said adblocking is still piracy. It doesn't matter that there are a bunch of good reasons to do it, it's still piracy. Piracy is fine.* [*] To be clear it's really not quite that simple because piracy does constitute some abstraction/derivative of lost revenue in our current systems and that does deprive people of value, however I think morally speaking it's pretty easy to come out on top if you are diligent about supporting creators in other ways. I don't make these choices easily, in general I'm down with drinking the hemlock, but the laws surrounding IP in the digital age are so obviously unjust and harmful that I'm not losing sleep.

movedx 5y ago
> It's interesting to see this touch a nerve so intensely, I think it's really exposing the lies people tell themselves to cope with a reality that isn't really internally consistent and that's why there's such a strong reaction. I'm not telling my self any lies. I deeply believe that my computer is my private property and I get full control over what executes on it. If you think otherwise you're delusional. I want to control what runs on my computer because by not doing so I run the risk of allowing something malicious to execute and thus I suffer long term, and perhaps others directly connected to me also suffer. I want to prevent that and I do so by stopping JavaScript from running automatically in my browser. I use uBlock for the same reason: I want to block elements from running on a website that aren't directly associated with the content I asked for. If after visiting the website it comes to light that the webmasters are actually only showing genuinely good adverts that are ethically and morally rendered (i.e. they're not using abusive practices), then I can choose to either whitelist that website or stop accessing it. I get to choose who does what with my computer.
- thot_experiment 5y ago
  Everything you said is true but none of is relevant to whether or not adblocking is piracy.
  - movedx 5y ago
    Ad networks run code on my system in order to render an advert. I block this as I did not consent to this, as the practices are abusive and go beyond the rendering of the advert (privacy concerns, big brother, censorship, etc.) Not wanting to have something imposed upon me without my permission, and not having the ability to first accept or reject a website's TOS before entering, means I have to assume the worst case (malware, malicious intent, bad practices, etc.) and therefore protect my self ahead of time. This is not piracy because I didn't know there were going to be adverts in the first place. And what adverts would have rendered were stopped by an adblocker or script blocker because I have to assume the worst will happen. I'm saying it's not piracy because it's (digital) self defense. It's assuming the worst going into a website, putting up defenses to protect against that worst case scenario, and the side effect of that is the website's revenue source is blocked. Sorry, not sorry. Find a better way of telling me about your products and services that doesn't mean I'm opening my self up to a good old fashioned digital screwing over.
    - esyir 5y ago
      That's a lot of text to rationalise it to yourself. It's at least in the spirit of piracy, and that's OK.
      - movedx 5y ago
        Now you're just being childish :-)
        esyir 5y ago
        In the end, it breaks down like this. AD (Youtube) Youtube says watch AD, then I'll give you the video. Pirate/Contested term: I will technologically circumvent the process and take the video anyway. Traditional piracy: Store says give money, then I'll give you the video Pirate: I will technologically circumvent the process and take the video anyway. The only difference here is that the "payment" is cash in one case, and an ad view in the other. Both cases deal with the same output, both put a barrier around the content, and both cases get that barrier circumvented via technological means that allow access to non-scarce content. The most charitable I can be here, is that "it's really really close, but because it's not explicit monetary payment, it's not piracy". But that's just playing word games. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck, or some close relative of said waterfowl. There's no shame in admitting that. I happily adblock too, but I'm not going to pretend I'm doing some virtuous deed by rising against the man to block an ad. I'm blocking them cause I don't like the inconveniences and issues with ads, and to hell with the creators ad revenue. So yes, I do think that those who skirt around that definition and rage at that are largely just trying to rationalize it with themselves.
xupybd 5y ago
I think this is the distinction. People that see nothing wrong with piracy are happy to equate it to ad blocking. Personally I will not pirate software but I'll block ads 'till the cows come home. I find the two completely different from a moral stand.
nobodyandproud 5y ago
Huh? Piracy is about illegally reproducing and or distributing copyrighted work. There’s no requirement for the recipient to view or even acknowledge the ad. The onus is on the distributor to do better. Is ad stripping in DVRs considered a violation of copyright?
- nhinck 5y ago
  > Is ad stripping in DVRs considered a violation of copyright? Why don't we ask TiVo?
  - nobodyandproud 5y ago
    https://explore.tivo.com/promos/arppromo https://explore.tivo.com/promos/arppromo Studios and broadcasters claim copyright violation, but it’s a dubious claim and overreach.
pbasista 5y ago
> Of course it's piracy At first define piracy and only then it would be possible to determine whether something is or is not piracy. > Piracy is taking shit that doesn't "belong" to you... This is a vague and imprecise description. If you are going to make definitive claims, you need a serious definition.

movedx 5y ago

> It's interesting to see this touch a nerve so intensely, I think it's really exposing the lies people tell themselves to cope with a reality that isn't really internally consistent and that's why there's such a strong reaction. I'm not telling my self any lies. I deeply believe that my computer is my private property and I get full control over what executes on it. If you think otherwise you're delusional. I want to control what runs on my computer because by not doing so I run the risk of allowing something malicious to execute and thus I suffer long term, and perhaps others directly connected to me also suffer. I want to prevent that and I do so by stopping JavaScript from running automatically in my browser. I use uBlock for the same reason: I want to block elements from running on a website that aren't directly associated with the content I asked for. If after visiting the website it comes to light that the webmasters are actually only showing genuinely good adverts that are ethically and morally rendered (i.e. they're not using abusive practices), then I can choose to either whitelist that website or stop accessing it. I get to choose who does what with my computer.

thot_experiment 5y ago
Everything you said is true but none of is relevant to whether or not adblocking is piracy.
- movedx 5y ago
  Ad networks run code on my system in order to render an advert. I block this as I did not consent to this, as the practices are abusive and go beyond the rendering of the advert (privacy concerns, big brother, censorship, etc.) Not wanting to have something imposed upon me without my permission, and not having the ability to first accept or reject a website's TOS before entering, means I have to assume the worst case (malware, malicious intent, bad practices, etc.) and therefore protect my self ahead of time. This is not piracy because I didn't know there were going to be adverts in the first place. And what adverts would have rendered were stopped by an adblocker or script blocker because I have to assume the worst will happen. I'm saying it's not piracy because it's (digital) self defense. It's assuming the worst going into a website, putting up defenses to protect against that worst case scenario, and the side effect of that is the website's revenue source is blocked. Sorry, not sorry. Find a better way of telling me about your products and services that doesn't mean I'm opening my self up to a good old fashioned digital screwing over.
  - esyir 5y ago
    That's a lot of text to rationalise it to yourself. It's at least in the spirit of piracy, and that's OK.
    - movedx 5y ago
      Now you're just being childish :-)
      - esyir 5y ago
        In the end, it breaks down like this. AD (Youtube) Youtube says watch AD, then I'll give you the video. Pirate/Contested term: I will technologically circumvent the process and take the video anyway. Traditional piracy: Store says give money, then I'll give you the video Pirate: I will technologically circumvent the process and take the video anyway. The only difference here is that the "payment" is cash in one case, and an ad view in the other. Both cases deal with the same output, both put a barrier around the content, and both cases get that barrier circumvented via technological means that allow access to non-scarce content. The most charitable I can be here, is that "it's really really close, but because it's not explicit monetary payment, it's not piracy". But that's just playing word games. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck, or some close relative of said waterfowl. There's no shame in admitting that. I happily adblock too, but I'm not going to pretend I'm doing some virtuous deed by rising against the man to block an ad. I'm blocking them cause I don't like the inconveniences and issues with ads, and to hell with the creators ad revenue. So yes, I do think that those who skirt around that definition and rage at that are largely just trying to rationalize it with themselves.

xupybd 5y ago

I think this is the distinction. People that see nothing wrong with piracy are happy to equate it to ad blocking. Personally I will not pirate software but I'll block ads 'till the cows come home. I find the two completely different from a moral stand.

nobodyandproud 5y ago

Huh? Piracy is about illegally reproducing and or distributing copyrighted work. There’s no requirement for the recipient to view or even acknowledge the ad. The onus is on the distributor to do better. Is ad stripping in DVRs considered a violation of copyright?

nhinck 5y ago
> Is ad stripping in DVRs considered a violation of copyright? Why don't we ask TiVo?
- nobodyandproud 5y ago
  https://explore.tivo.com/promos/arppromo https://explore.tivo.com/promos/arppromo Studios and broadcasters claim copyright violation, but it’s a dubious claim and overreach.

pbasista 5y ago

> Of course it's piracy At first define piracy and only then it would be possible to determine whether something is or is not piracy. > Piracy is taking shit that doesn't "belong" to you... This is a vague and imprecise description. If you are going to make definitive claims, you need a serious definition.