3 ms·

* That's because there is no technical solution, this is a people problem, not a tech problem. * That's just not correct. The technical "solution" of Napster a

* That's because there is no technical solution, this is a people problem, not a tech problem. * That's just not correct. The technical "solution" of Napster and later torrenting enabled this on a mass scale, did it not? Surely that's a "technical" matter and not only a people matter? If you make it technology easy enough that a 14yo with little tech skills can download the latest pop album for free and with virtually no risk of any consequences, then you've technically provided a way for someone to take the easy way out. People are like water - they'll almost always take the easiest route to get what they want. If it's easier to torrent/download and there are no repercussions (of whatever type), then they'll choose that more often than not. Take away the tech that made it easy (or technically add in repercussions like a virus/trojan) and they'll stop.

baremetal 15y ago
Data is just bits, bits can be copied with virtually no cost. Welcome to the internet.
pavel_lishin 15y ago
I hate to get 2nd-amendment-peanut-butter into your piracy-chocolate, but as I was reading your comment, the phrase "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" flashed through my mind. Guns are a mix of a technology/people problem, must as much as copyright infringement is, and we haven't even solved that problem yet. (At least, we don't seem to have solved it in the USA.)
- Natsu 15y ago
  There is one really good point in there. If you want to be a successful artist, make it so that people want to support you. That's what Louis CK was doing the other day. That's how Howard Taylor operates. It's just good business. You have happy customers. That makes you happy. Good times all around.
Natsu 15y ago
You can't make it hard. People have been trying that for ages and all that happened was that people got really good at cracking the protections. It only takes one "smart cow" to open the barn door for the rest. The situation is not symmetric. The attackers have an overwhelming advantage: the defense must be perfect while the attackers of a protection scheme need just one flaw. That's so massively unfair that we have never yet seen it succeed for very long. And even then, most of the things that weren't cracked were ignored because there were easier ways to get the content. Which is, of course, an observation you were quite correct to point out. You can't take away the enabling, either, any more than you can turn back the hands of time. Information is information. If I can transmit a message to you, then I can do so whether or not it's copyrighted. I can just encrypt it to block out any middlemen who would otherwise censor it. I can route it through third parties. I can use steganography to hide it. It's not fair, but it is. Like much of life, it's evolve or die. Even if we ramp the controls and enforcement to police state levels, one look at China's Great Firewall shows that it leaks like a sieve. What you say has been tried already. For my entire life. It has yet to succeed. I don't believe it ever will.
icebraining 15y ago
What tech do you propose to take away? HTTP? Because a big part of sharing is done through generic servers and browsers, possibly with generic SSL encryption to avoid detection by middle men. How do you take that away without destroying the web?
burgerbrain 15y ago
"Take away the tech that made it easy (or technically add in repercussions like a virus/trojan) and they'll stop." Just admit it. You have no idea what you are talking about. There is no "the tech". There is no head to cut off. If one group of people stop distributing the knowledge to share files, the another will take its place.

baremetal 15y ago

Data is just bits, bits can be copied with virtually no cost. Welcome to the internet.

pavel_lishin 15y ago

I hate to get 2nd-amendment-peanut-butter into your piracy-chocolate, but as I was reading your comment, the phrase "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" flashed through my mind. Guns are a mix of a technology/people problem, must as much as copyright infringement is, and we haven't even solved that problem yet. (At least, we don't seem to have solved it in the USA.)

Natsu 15y ago
There is one really good point in there. If you want to be a successful artist, make it so that people want to support you. That's what Louis CK was doing the other day. That's how Howard Taylor operates. It's just good business. You have happy customers. That makes you happy. Good times all around.

Natsu 15y ago

You can't make it hard. People have been trying that for ages and all that happened was that people got really good at cracking the protections. It only takes one "smart cow" to open the barn door for the rest. The situation is not symmetric. The attackers have an overwhelming advantage: the defense must be perfect while the attackers of a protection scheme need just one flaw. That's so massively unfair that we have never yet seen it succeed for very long. And even then, most of the things that weren't cracked were ignored because there were easier ways to get the content. Which is, of course, an observation you were quite correct to point out. You can't take away the enabling, either, any more than you can turn back the hands of time. Information is information. If I can transmit a message to you, then I can do so whether or not it's copyrighted. I can just encrypt it to block out any middlemen who would otherwise censor it. I can route it through third parties. I can use steganography to hide it. It's not fair, but it is. Like much of life, it's evolve or die. Even if we ramp the controls and enforcement to police state levels, one look at China's Great Firewall shows that it leaks like a sieve. What you say has been tried already. For my entire life. It has yet to succeed. I don't believe it ever will.

icebraining 15y ago

What tech do you propose to take away? HTTP? Because a big part of sharing is done through generic servers and browsers, possibly with generic SSL encryption to avoid detection by middle men. How do you take that away without destroying the web?

burgerbrain 15y ago

"Take away the tech that made it easy (or technically add in repercussions like a virus/trojan) and they'll stop." Just admit it. You have no idea what you are talking about. There is no "the tech". There is no head to cut off. If one group of people stop distributing the knowledge to share files, the another will take its place.