4 ms·

My interpretation was that they had a budget of $x to run their servers with from y paying customers. $x in no way could provide the services that y+z needed (z

by TheCapn 14y ago

My interpretation was that they had a budget of $x to run their servers with from y paying customers. $x in no way could provide the services that y+z needed (z being the number of pirates) regardless of infrastructure or efficiency of code. Instead they decided to cut losses and refund without finding a way to block z or monetize it.

debacle 14y ago
I think you're trying to read between the lines of what the article stated.
- xauronx 14y ago
  Really? That's exactly what I got out of the article as well. They have to pay for the bandwidth somehow.
- Steko 14y ago
  I think you're jumping through hoops trying to rationalize piracy as having no negative effects.
  - debacle 14y ago
    I didn't say that anywhere. Piracy obviously resulted in lost revenue, but that's not what this article is about - it's about bad server software.
    - Steko 14y ago
      "Piracy obviously resulted in lost revenue" Previously on HN: "No harm, no foul."