7 ms·

I congratulate you on possessing such an easily appeased conscience.

by hyperbovine 12y ago

coryfklein 12y ago
You assume he is doing something wrong, but using torrents to stream video is probably amoral, not immoral.
- therealdrag0 12y ago
  Not compensating content creators for their work is immoral.
  - JetSpiegel 12y ago
    Buy content doesn't compensate the creators anyway. At least for any content with intermediates, like publishers.
    - Buge 12y ago
      Some actors earn percentages. Even if they don't, if a film does poorly, the investors will be less likely to invest in more films and the workers will have a harder time finding work on a new film.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
  - KaoruAoiShiho 12y ago
    It's owning property that's immoral.
  - fit2rule 12y ago
    I use Put.io to distribute my own content to paying users. Your point?
    - therealdrag0 12y ago
      Uh? I don't know how that relates to my point. Obviously torrent can be used as a content delivery service without breaking laws or ethics.
  - coryfklein 12y ago
    I never said it wasn't, but that's not what is at discussion here.
    - therealdrag0 12y ago
      Good point. My comment was more to explain hyperbovine's comment than to endorse the need to this discussion here. Streaming video can definitely be done without going against ethics.
mbesto 12y ago
What does my conscience have anything to do with the technical functionality of this system and a discussion on the legality of it?
atmosx 12y ago
conscience? When you explain to me why a guy selling one tomato that once eaten can not be replicated and a digital good that once replicated loses none of it's quality are the same, I'll start talking about conscience. ps. I'm not saying that people should not pay for digital content. But when there are farmers out there who sell their products under the same rules Sony Entertainment sells mp3's of songs written 20 years in digital format, sorry there's something utterly wrong with the system.
- Sandman 12y ago
  Ok. What do you propose, how should we pay for digital content?
  - glennsl 12y ago
    To find the right answers, one needs to pose the right questions. In this case, the problem is not that it is difficult to get paid for digital content, but that it is difficult to make a living by producing digital content. The question you ought to be asking, then, is how do we encourage the production of quality digital content? To that question my answer would be a combination of basic income and crowdfunding.
    - touristtam 12y ago
      or leave the system as it is an cap the copyright holder's right. I have nothing against Bigcorp making big bucks for the first 10 years of the said product, but when they have already made some substantial gain within those 10 years, who is then benefiting from the profit and to what aim should we consider rightful as a society? I am only pointing out to the fact the copyright is there not only to benefit the individual but as well the society as a whole.
      - tatterdemalion 12y ago
        This is not a solution because the problem is not moral, it is technical: the reproduction of digital content is not controllable in the long-term.
delluminatus 12y ago
This happens every time someone brings up torrenting on HN: a baseless, sarcastic, unsubstantiated, "moral" judgement. Why do you feel the need to stick your head into the comment section and spit out a worthless one-line comment about conscience? Please keep your morality complex out of our technical discussion.
- hyperbovine 12y ago
  Oh boo-hoo. If your dainty technical discussion cannot withstand the cold, hard fact that 99% of the time this particular technology is used to steal movies and TV shows, then I'd say that merits some discussion. Interesting btw that it's verboten for me to pass any sort of moral judgement in this thread, whereas you have license to label my opinion worthless. Hypocrite.
  - Tehnix 12y ago
    I could never see this movie or tv-series because I'm not in the US......... or I could torrent it. See the situation?
- crucialfelix 12y ago
  There are discussions here about legal and technical issues and also about how the service could operate financially. We could discuss UI and how the service was built too. Why is a discussion about the morality of the service implicitly not allowed ? Where is it carved in stone that the morality of our actions or services must not be discussed on Hackernews ? Who are you to proclaim this, and in such a harsh manner ? In discussing a service that is designed to allow users to conduct piracy, a discussion of the morality of that act is entirely permissible. If I wanted to criticize hyperbovine's comment I would say that it didn't have any in depth thoughts or insight. But that isn't what you did, and the content of your reply is loaded with a lot of pre-recorded attacks. But your response to him was quite hostile, far out of proportion to the parent comment. I find your aggression towards the topic to be very negative "morality complex" ? Do you mean to imply that morals are some kind of defect that reasonable people should not be burdened with ?

I congratulate you on possessing such an easily appeased conscience.

coryfklein 12y ago

You assume he is doing something wrong, but using torrents to stream video is probably amoral, not immoral.

therealdrag0 12y ago
Not compensating content creators for their work is immoral.
- JetSpiegel 12y ago
  Buy content doesn't compensate the creators anyway. At least for any content with intermediates, like publishers.
  - Buge 12y ago
    Some actors earn percentages. Even if they don't, if a film does poorly, the investors will be less likely to invest in more films and the workers will have a harder time finding work on a new film.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- KaoruAoiShiho 12y ago
  It's owning property that's immoral.
- fit2rule 12y ago
  I use Put.io to distribute my own content to paying users. Your point?
  - therealdrag0 12y ago
    Uh? I don't know how that relates to my point. Obviously torrent can be used as a content delivery service without breaking laws or ethics.
- coryfklein 12y ago
  I never said it wasn't, but that's not what is at discussion here.
  - therealdrag0 12y ago
    Good point. My comment was more to explain hyperbovine's comment than to endorse the need to this discussion here. Streaming video can definitely be done without going against ethics.

mbesto 12y ago

What does my conscience have anything to do with the technical functionality of this system and a discussion on the legality of it?

atmosx 12y ago

conscience? When you explain to me why a guy selling one tomato that once eaten can not be replicated and a digital good that once replicated loses none of it's quality are the same, I'll start talking about conscience. ps. I'm not saying that people should not pay for digital content. But when there are farmers out there who sell their products under the same rules Sony Entertainment sells mp3's of songs written 20 years in digital format, sorry there's something utterly wrong with the system.

Sandman 12y ago
Ok. What do you propose, how should we pay for digital content?
- glennsl 12y ago
  To find the right answers, one needs to pose the right questions. In this case, the problem is not that it is difficult to get paid for digital content, but that it is difficult to make a living by producing digital content. The question you ought to be asking, then, is how do we encourage the production of quality digital content? To that question my answer would be a combination of basic income and crowdfunding.
  - touristtam 12y ago
    or leave the system as it is an cap the copyright holder's right. I have nothing against Bigcorp making big bucks for the first 10 years of the said product, but when they have already made some substantial gain within those 10 years, who is then benefiting from the profit and to what aim should we consider rightful as a society? I am only pointing out to the fact the copyright is there not only to benefit the individual but as well the society as a whole.
    - tatterdemalion 12y ago
      This is not a solution because the problem is not moral, it is technical: the reproduction of digital content is not controllable in the long-term.

delluminatus 12y ago

This happens every time someone brings up torrenting on HN: a baseless, sarcastic, unsubstantiated, "moral" judgement. Why do you feel the need to stick your head into the comment section and spit out a worthless one-line comment about conscience? Please keep your morality complex out of our technical discussion.

hyperbovine 12y ago
Oh boo-hoo. If your dainty technical discussion cannot withstand the cold, hard fact that 99% of the time this particular technology is used to steal movies and TV shows, then I'd say that merits some discussion. Interesting btw that it's verboten for me to pass any sort of moral judgement in this thread, whereas you have license to label my opinion worthless. Hypocrite.
- Tehnix 12y ago
  I could never see this movie or tv-series because I'm not in the US......... or I could torrent it. See the situation?
crucialfelix 12y ago
There are discussions here about legal and technical issues and also about how the service could operate financially. We could discuss UI and how the service was built too. Why is a discussion about the morality of the service implicitly not allowed ? Where is it carved in stone that the morality of our actions or services must not be discussed on Hackernews ? Who are you to proclaim this, and in such a harsh manner ? In discussing a service that is designed to allow users to conduct piracy, a discussion of the morality of that act is entirely permissible. If I wanted to criticize hyperbovine's comment I would say that it didn't have any in depth thoughts or insight. But that isn't what you did, and the content of your reply is loaded with a lot of pre-recorded attacks. But your response to him was quite hostile, far out of proportion to the parent comment. I find your aggression towards the topic to be very negative "morality complex" ? Do you mean to imply that morals are some kind of defect that reasonable people should not be burdened with ?