5 ms·

i just find the tension and contradictions of piracy kinda fascinating. "i hate this so much but i have to get it cause i apparently need it so badly". somethin

by pxoe 2y ago

i just find the tension and contradictions of piracy kinda fascinating. "i hate this so much but i have to get it cause i apparently need it so badly". something being deserving to be obtained, yet not deserving to be paid for. and most of all, somebody feeling so entitled to it that they just can't actually refuse it completely.

cxr 2y ago
You didn't answer the question, and overall you're being very mercurial in this thread. Write coherently. > i just find the tension and contradictions of piracy kinda fascinating You're calling watching a TV show without watching the commercials "piracy"? That's a very broad definition of "piracy" that I'd venture has almost no support outside of your comments here.
- speff 2y ago
  I'd call it piracy in a way. Ads are how that specific piece of content is made available - whether it be for paying file hosting costs, creator living expenses, video production, etc. Consuming media without providing compensation for it (through ad views in this case) would meet my definition of new-age piracy.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - wahnfrieden 2y ago
    You want adblock developers to be caged by the state, like piracy site providers?
    - speff 2y ago
      No
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- pxoe 2y ago
  If anything, i'd say that your interpretations and subsequent tangents are incoherent. It's really very simple. Get better at understanding.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - cxr 2y ago
    I implore you to (a) point to a single tangent that is not a direct response to your remarks and (b) explain how your decision to rant, apropos of nothing, against this video player app's creators is anything other than a bizarre non-sequitur
    - pxoe 2y ago
      It's a yet another frontend that blocks ads (ads are a form of monetization), and so there's the question of 'do people deserve to be paid'. It's also talking about "taking ownership" over "your content" on its homepage, so there's the point about the content literally not being "yours".
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]

by pxoe 2y ago

cxr 2y ago

You didn't answer the question, and overall you're being very mercurial in this thread. Write coherently. > i just find the tension and contradictions of piracy kinda fascinating You're calling watching a TV show without watching the commercials "piracy"? That's a very broad definition of "piracy" that I'd venture has almost no support outside of your comments here.

speff 2y ago
I'd call it piracy in a way. Ads are how that specific piece of content is made available - whether it be for paying file hosting costs, creator living expenses, video production, etc. Consuming media without providing compensation for it (through ad views in this case) would meet my definition of new-age piracy.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- wahnfrieden 2y ago
  You want adblock developers to be caged by the state, like piracy site providers?
  - speff 2y ago
    No
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
pxoe 2y ago
If anything, i'd say that your interpretations and subsequent tangents are incoherent. It's really very simple. Get better at understanding.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- cxr 2y ago
  I implore you to (a) point to a single tangent that is not a direct response to your remarks and (b) explain how your decision to rant, apropos of nothing, against this video player app's creators is anything other than a bizarre non-sequitur
  - pxoe 2y ago
    It's a yet another frontend that blocks ads (ads are a form of monetization), and so there's the question of 'do people deserve to be paid'. It's also talking about "taking ownership" over "your content" on its homepage, so there's the point about the content literally not being "yours".
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]