3 ms·

too hard/too inconvenient

by hhjj 14y ago

alexqgb 14y ago
Um, we're talking about one click shopping. ONE. CLICK. And that's still too much? It is? Right, you've just crossed into the asshole zone. And by the way, people like you are the reason that stores have those anti-theft tag readers by their front doors. And @darklajid: who says I'm here to change your mind? Perhaps it's really about pointing out how people who think like this are just being monumental pricks. Whether or not you're comfortable with that is up to you. But if you think you can be a prick and not get called on it, well, guess again. One more thing: not paying is stealing. Copy all you want, that's not theft (making isn't taking, etc.) But just understand that the second you make a copy, you own the artist money. And if you decide to keep that money, you're holding onto something that is no longer yours. Which, as we all know, is explicitly wrong. It's like bouncing a check. Sure, the money to back it will be in your account (i.e. your possession) for a few days after, but that doesn't mean it's your money, in that spending it on something else will land you in legal trouble if doing so causes the check to bounce. It's different in that the artist doesn't know you stole from them by keeping money to which you're not entitled, so it's not such a direct violation of trust. But it's still wrong. And since the artist has no moral obligation to make a transaction seamless, you can't put yourself back in the right by saying "well, I found that paying was harder than breathing, so that means the artists forfeits completely." Sorry, but that's not how the law or ethics work. And I think you know it.
- krickle 14y ago
  > not paying is stealing > that's not how the law works You are a hypocrite, you're just frothing at the mouth claiming anything you'd like even if it's self-contradictory. Coupled with the ad hominem attacks, we all know it is you that is the "monumental prick".
  - alexqgb 14y ago
    So let me get this straight, you say you've got a problem with ad hominem attacks, but that doesn't stop you from personally attacking others. And when you do, the term of abuse you employ is...(wait for it)...hypocrite. Unbelievable. Just out of curiosity, do even know what the words you're using mean? Specifically can you define "hypocrite" and use it properly in a sentence?
    - krickle 14y ago
      Yes, well done. But I've a policy against arguing with trolls so I can't be baited.

too hard/too inconvenient

by hhjj 14y ago

too hard/too inconvenient

Um, we're talking about one click shopping. ONE. CLICK. And that's still too much? It is? Right, you've just crossed into the asshole zone. And by the way, people like you are the reason that stores have those anti-theft tag readers by their front doors. And @darklajid: who says I'm here to change your mind? Perhaps it's really about pointing out how people who think like this are just being monumental pricks. Whether or not you're comfortable with that is up to you. But if you think you can be a prick and not get called on it, well, guess again. One more thing: not paying is stealing. Copy all you want, that's not theft (making isn't taking, etc.) But just understand that the second you make a copy, you own the artist money. And if you decide to keep that money, you're holding onto something that is no longer yours. Which, as we all know, is explicitly wrong. It's like bouncing a check. Sure, the money to back it will be in your account (i.e. your possession) for a few days after, but that doesn't mean it's your money, in that spending it on something else will land you in legal trouble if doing so causes the check to bounce. It's different in that the artist doesn't know you stole from them by keeping money to which you're not entitled, so it's not such a direct violation of trust. But it's still wrong. And since the artist has no moral obligation to make a transaction seamless, you can't put yourself back in the right by saying "well, I found that paying was harder than breathing, so that means the artists forfeits completely." Sorry, but that's not how the law or ethics work. And I think you know it.

krickle 14y ago
> not paying is stealing > that's not how the law works You are a hypocrite, you're just frothing at the mouth claiming anything you'd like even if it's self-contradictory. Coupled with the ad hominem attacks, we all know it is you that is the "monumental prick".
- alexqgb 14y ago
  So let me get this straight, you say you've got a problem with ad hominem attacks, but that doesn't stop you from personally attacking others. And when you do, the term of abuse you employ is...(wait for it)...hypocrite. Unbelievable. Just out of curiosity, do even know what the words you're using mean? Specifically can you define "hypocrite" and use it properly in a sentence?
  - krickle 14y ago
    Yes, well done. But I've a policy against arguing with trolls so I can't be baited.