5 ms·

sure - let's have a debate about it. either way you're depriving the creator of revenue. what's your argument? probably something about the fact that since it c

sure - let's have a debate about it. either way you're depriving the creator of revenue. what's your argument? probably something about the fact that since it can be copied for free then it's not worth anything?

JohnFen 4y ago
Edited to add this: > either way you're depriving the creator of revenue. That may be the case -- but doesn't mean you're stealing. It may mean the creator might want to find a better way of monetizing, though. > probably something about the fact that since it can be copied for free then it's not worth anything? Not at all. The ease of duplication has no relevance to the value of a thing. My argument is simple. It's my machine, and I get to say what bits do and do not get processed. I should also point out that I don't block YouTube ads, personally. I pay for YouTube Premium instead. I like to reimburse the creators. However, at least outside of YouTube, advertising is a scummy, spying business. I don't block ads there, either, but I absolutely do block JS and other means of tracking me. That has the side-effect of blocking ads, but if an ad isn't spying, I'll see it. It's telling how few don't, though.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  so I assume you believe software cannot be stolen, per your definition? piracy is OK, etc?
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    No, that's not my stance. Pirated software is software that was obtained through fraudulent means. YouTube is not streaming bits to me because I tricked it to. It's doing so willingly. The analogy I would make is that, once I've obtained a piece of software, there is no ethical issue with me deciding to modify my copy of it, perhaps to remove assets I don't want included. So what is your argument that adblocking is a form of theft?
    - endisneigh 4y ago
      my argument isn't that adblocking is theft, my argument is specifically that if you're watching a video and circumvent the ad through technology, that is, since it is. clicking skip isn't. not watching it isn't. scrolling down and reading the comments isn't, same with just muting the sound. certainly you're not obligated to engage with the ad. if circumventing it is not theft, then piracy is not a problem for the same reason. > The analogy I would make is that, once I've obtained a piece of software, there is no ethical issue with me deciding to modify my copy of it, perhaps to remove assets I don't want included. your analogy, is also piracy, since by your stance here removing restrictions that might requirement payment is OK even though that too is piracy. though if you want to be pedantic all adblocking can be considered fraud since you're deceiving the content provider (by blocking ads) for personal gain (not seeing ads).
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        > my argument is specifically that if you're watching a video and circumvent the ad through technology, that is, since it is That's your assertion, but what is your reasoning? This is an honest question, because it's not at all clear to me why it should be considered theft. > your analogy, is also piracy, since by your stance here removing restrictions that might requirement payment is OK even though that too is piracy. And I have the same question here. Why should that be considered theft? At worst, it's a violation of terms of service, it seems to me. > though if you want to be pedantic all adblocking can be considered fraud since you're deceiving the content provider (by blocking ads) for personal gain (not seeing ads). I disagree that it's fraud, too. I'm not deceiving anybody. And the "personal gain" aspect seems strained to me. "Personal gain" typically means "material gain" -- that is, being materially enriched.
        endisneigh 4y ago
        > That's your assertion, but what is your reasoning? This is an honest question, because it's not at all clear to me why it should be considered theft. it's theft to me because you're taking things - the product of effort, labor, electricity, etc - without any payment when requested, in this case, ads. same reason I think sneaking into a theater or amusement park without paying is also theft. > I disagree that it's fraud, too. I'm not deceiving anybody. And the "personal gain" aspect seems strained to me. "Personal gain" typically means "material gain" -- that is, being materially enriched. are you not materially enriched if you get access to sites without paying? if you don't gain anything, then there would be no reason to do it. the preference is the indication that something has been gained. obviously you can believe whatever you want, but there's really nothing different about avoiding ads and cracking software, aka piracy. and if you're OK with that, fundamentally there's really nothing special about digital goods, including money whose existence for many exists primarily virtually. there are people who think theft is OK, all land is stolen, etc. that's fine, I guess, I just have a different opinion.
  - account42 4y ago
    Copyiright infringement is not and has never been theft. Blocking ads is also not copyright infringement. And copyright infringement is also not piracy. Actual piracy is of course not ok since it generally involves depriving others of something, often their lives.

JohnFen 4y ago

Edited to add this: > either way you're depriving the creator of revenue. That may be the case -- but doesn't mean you're stealing. It may mean the creator might want to find a better way of monetizing, though. > probably something about the fact that since it can be copied for free then it's not worth anything? Not at all. The ease of duplication has no relevance to the value of a thing. My argument is simple. It's my machine, and I get to say what bits do and do not get processed. I should also point out that I don't block YouTube ads, personally. I pay for YouTube Premium instead. I like to reimburse the creators. However, at least outside of YouTube, advertising is a scummy, spying business. I don't block ads there, either, but I absolutely do block JS and other means of tracking me. That has the side-effect of blocking ads, but if an ad isn't spying, I'll see it. It's telling how few don't, though.

endisneigh 4y ago
so I assume you believe software cannot be stolen, per your definition? piracy is OK, etc?
- JohnFen 4y ago
  No, that's not my stance. Pirated software is software that was obtained through fraudulent means. YouTube is not streaming bits to me because I tricked it to. It's doing so willingly. The analogy I would make is that, once I've obtained a piece of software, there is no ethical issue with me deciding to modify my copy of it, perhaps to remove assets I don't want included. So what is your argument that adblocking is a form of theft?
  - endisneigh 4y ago
    my argument isn't that adblocking is theft, my argument is specifically that if you're watching a video and circumvent the ad through technology, that is, since it is. clicking skip isn't. not watching it isn't. scrolling down and reading the comments isn't, same with just muting the sound. certainly you're not obligated to engage with the ad. if circumventing it is not theft, then piracy is not a problem for the same reason. > The analogy I would make is that, once I've obtained a piece of software, there is no ethical issue with me deciding to modify my copy of it, perhaps to remove assets I don't want included. your analogy, is also piracy, since by your stance here removing restrictions that might requirement payment is OK even though that too is piracy. though if you want to be pedantic all adblocking can be considered fraud since you're deceiving the content provider (by blocking ads) for personal gain (not seeing ads).
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      > my argument is specifically that if you're watching a video and circumvent the ad through technology, that is, since it is That's your assertion, but what is your reasoning? This is an honest question, because it's not at all clear to me why it should be considered theft. > your analogy, is also piracy, since by your stance here removing restrictions that might requirement payment is OK even though that too is piracy. And I have the same question here. Why should that be considered theft? At worst, it's a violation of terms of service, it seems to me. > though if you want to be pedantic all adblocking can be considered fraud since you're deceiving the content provider (by blocking ads) for personal gain (not seeing ads). I disagree that it's fraud, too. I'm not deceiving anybody. And the "personal gain" aspect seems strained to me. "Personal gain" typically means "material gain" -- that is, being materially enriched.
      - endisneigh 4y ago
        > That's your assertion, but what is your reasoning? This is an honest question, because it's not at all clear to me why it should be considered theft. it's theft to me because you're taking things - the product of effort, labor, electricity, etc - without any payment when requested, in this case, ads. same reason I think sneaking into a theater or amusement park without paying is also theft. > I disagree that it's fraud, too. I'm not deceiving anybody. And the "personal gain" aspect seems strained to me. "Personal gain" typically means "material gain" -- that is, being materially enriched. are you not materially enriched if you get access to sites without paying? if you don't gain anything, then there would be no reason to do it. the preference is the indication that something has been gained. obviously you can believe whatever you want, but there's really nothing different about avoiding ads and cracking software, aka piracy. and if you're OK with that, fundamentally there's really nothing special about digital goods, including money whose existence for many exists primarily virtually. there are people who think theft is OK, all land is stolen, etc. that's fine, I guess, I just have a different opinion.
- account42 4y ago
  Copyiright infringement is not and has never been theft. Blocking ads is also not copyright infringement. And copyright infringement is also not piracy. Actual piracy is of course not ok since it generally involves depriving others of something, often their lives.