The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Every now and then I wonder why they've still been using web sites to search on, giving a static point of failure to attack, instead of letting the search go P2P as well.
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
Man. There are almost no topics that cause me to engage emotionally. Somehow, chat has managed to hit on almost all of them the last few days. Piracy, Snowden/data theft and the rights of corporations are three of maybe 5 hot button issues I have. I'm waiting for the inevitable discussions of vandalism and adultery now.
It only takes one personal crusade to make someone hugely annoying.
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
It's difficult to argue they're committing any moral wrong
They're obtaining something for free in a way that does no harm to the producers of it that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to
Really, the solution is to bring the rest of the world up to a standard of living approaching the first world but people never seem very keen to get behind that
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
Sure. Why not?
Because you don't have the right to things that aren't yours just because you want them. Why should you have access to a game someone else worked on just because you want to play it? That is the most extreme attitude of selfishness and immaturity imaginable.
That isn't a reason why, it is an ad hominem attack.
Every now and then I wonder why they've still been using web sites to search on, giving a static point of failure to attack, instead of letting the search go P2P as well.
Ad views?
Yeah I mean duh, it's a for profit thing
And that's the heart of the matter. They don't care about data being free or any bs like that. They care about profiting off the work of others by racking up free ad views.
Free ad views? You think it doesn't take effort and talent to create and grow a website as large and popular as tpb?
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
One day I will set up a not-for-profit company that invades people's homes, spraypaints THUG LYFE in their living room, photocopies all their books, seduces their wives/husbands, and then releases any sensitive information I can find on their computer.
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
It's difficult to argue they're committing any moral wrong
They're obtaining something for free in a way that does no harm to the producers of it that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to
Really, the solution is to bring the rest of the world up to a standard of living approaching the first world but people never seem very keen to get behind that
Stolen games increase demand for hardware both locally and internationally. A net good.
And increase demand for internet access, resulting in all sorts of positive development.
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
It's difficult to argue they're committing any moral wrong
They're obtaining something for free in a way that does no harm to the producers of it that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to
Really, the solution is to bring the rest of the world up to a standard of living approaching the first world but people never seem very keen to get behind that
I think is difficult to argue they are not. The game is created by people. They agree to give it to you in exchange for money if you refuse to give them the money but still play it, they are harmed. You got the benefit if their time and work. They did not get your money. By what definition is that not a harm?
Even if only 1 in 100,000 pirates would buy the game in a world without piracy, they are harmed because they lost that 1 sale.
Are you in favour the French solution where a peppercorn tax is levied and distributed to artists to compensate them for their hypothetical losses to piracy?
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
hmmmmm
i convinced my buddy to apply for a job at my company
he's gotten a lot of raises recently i guess and is making more than i thought
they 'only' offered him a 9% raise, and he has a 5% raise effective in March if he stays where he's at
he says he's going to decline, that he only applied as a favor to me and he would have taken the job if it was a really great offer, but now he wants to wait six months until he has more time to apply other places and see what he can get
The other day I had a bathtub brainfart about how an individual rational capitalist opposes actual free market capitalism.
I always tell you in not a big free market guy. I believe in a heavily regulated market to solve all collective action problems, and that companies should only act to maximize profits within the regulatory regime. I'm in favor of much, much more regulation and enforcement action than we have now.
And I'm a social democrat (as in believing in it, not voting for the Social Democrats), and I agree wholeheartedly. If corporations insist on wanting to be human beings, the state needs to have a whip to force them to act as decent human beings.
+3
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Teamregular
Even if only 1 in 100,000 pirates would buy the game in a world without piracy, they are harmed because they lost that 1 sale.
Let's say a game costs $50.
15-year old Bob has $50 disposable income per month. He downloads ten games each month.
How many sales were lost?
Aggregate the bobs. Every ten bobs should be 1 lost sale for each of the game companies. But even it in reality all the bobs in the world would have yielded 1 sale, the bobs are hurting the game maker by pirating.
Also, let's not forget that bob uses a high speed internet connection and has a computer capable of playing 10 brand new 50 dollar games a month. He had spending power, and chose to invest it in these things instead, possibly because he assumed games would be cheap or free afterwards.
You can't always get what you want, and bob's current financial situation is not the responsibility of the developers. Maybe bob should only be playing one game a month on bob's nice computer (oh the hardship).
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Most of the pirates in the world are from countries from the Middle East, or India or Brazil/South America where game prices are inflated to a ridiculous degree, if they even have the games at all.
How is that relevant? It's ok to steal entertainment just because it costs a lot?
It's difficult to argue they're committing any moral wrong
They're obtaining something for free in a way that does no harm to the producers of it that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to
Really, the solution is to bring the rest of the world up to a standard of living approaching the first world but people never seem very keen to get behind that
I think is difficult to argue they are not. The game is created by people. They agree to give it to you in exchange for money if you refuse to give them the money but still play it, they are harmed. You got the benefit if their time and work. They did not get your money. By what definition is that not a harm?
Even if only 1 in 100,000 pirates would buy the game in a world without piracy, they are harmed because they lost that 1 sale.
Are you in favour the French solution where a peppercorn tax is levied and distributed to artists to compensate them for their hypothetical losses to piracy?
I'm not familiar with their approach.
More cost effective than prosecuting pirates (although they do that too, with enthusiasm)
The basic logic is that losses to piracy are very small, even by the most generous hypothetical estimates. It's possible to collect this amount as a tax without too much objection, from various places that it seems appropriate to do so (isps, storage media sales, etc). That money is then funneled back into the content industry with the object of encouraging new content generation.
Also, let's not forget that bob uses a high speed internet connection and has a computer capable of playing 10 brand new 50 dollar games a month. He had spending power, and chose to invest it in these things instead, possibly because he assumed games would be cheap or free afterwards.
This reminds me of the RIAA logic: ten times faster download speed = ten times the piracy!
Literally an argument they made when they busted some CD-copying den. The CD burners were 12x speed, that's 12x the amount of pirated CDs of what was actually found!
Posts
Yeah I mean duh, it's a for profit thing
edit: though those look like shitheel "supporters".
Good dude tho.
One time he was sitting at his computer complaining it didn't work. I went over there and he didn't have it on.
When I turned it on he goes "boy, you really know bout them computers" and I was tech support from then on.
For some reason this in particular seems really bad for the old "low price, enormous shipping cost" misdirection
This one guy wants £9.59 for a neoware ca5 plus £105.81 shipping
That is more than it costs to have a wrecked vehicle moved halfway across the country by hi-ab
Sure. Why not?
It only takes one personal crusade to make someone hugely annoying.
It's difficult to argue they're committing any moral wrong
They're obtaining something for free in a way that does no harm to the producers of it that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to
Really, the solution is to bring the rest of the world up to a standard of living approaching the first world but people never seem very keen to get behind that
That isn't a reason why, it is an ad hominem attack.
Free ad views? You think it doesn't take effort and talent to create and grow a website as large and popular as tpb?
quick pick a side with respect to the pros and cons of international development funding and help me with these barricades
*drills a round hole in the barricade*
And destroys their Monopoly sets, if any.
Let's say a game costs $50.
15-year old Bob has $50 disposable income per month. He downloads ten games each month.
How many sales were lost?
Stolen games increase demand for hardware both locally and internationally. A net good.
And increase demand for internet access, resulting in all sorts of positive development.
Are you in favour the French solution where a peppercorn tax is levied and distributed to artists to compensate them for their hypothetical losses to piracy?
i convinced my buddy to apply for a job at my company
he's gotten a lot of raises recently i guess and is making more than i thought
they 'only' offered him a 9% raise, and he has a 5% raise effective in March if he stays where he's at
he says he's going to decline, that he only applied as a favor to me and he would have taken the job if it was a really great offer, but now he wants to wait six months until he has more time to apply other places and see what he can get
negotiate, maybe you can get what you want
And I'm a social democrat (as in believing in it, not voting for the Social Democrats), and I agree wholeheartedly. If corporations insist on wanting to be human beings, the state needs to have a whip to force them to act as decent human beings.
Also, let's not forget that bob uses a high speed internet connection and has a computer capable of playing 10 brand new 50 dollar games a month. He had spending power, and chose to invest it in these things instead, possibly because he assumed games would be cheap or free afterwards.
You can't always get what you want, and bob's current financial situation is not the responsibility of the developers. Maybe bob should only be playing one game a month on bob's nice computer (oh the hardship).
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
More cost effective than prosecuting pirates (although they do that too, with enthusiasm)
The basic logic is that losses to piracy are very small, even by the most generous hypothetical estimates. It's possible to collect this amount as a tax without too much objection, from various places that it seems appropriate to do so (isps, storage media sales, etc). That money is then funneled back into the content industry with the object of encouraging new content generation.
I don't even have time to finish the games I pay for.
This reminds me of the RIAA logic: ten times faster download speed = ten times the piracy!
Literally an argument they made when they busted some CD-copying den. The CD burners were 12x speed, that's 12x the amount of pirated CDs of what was actually found!
but without piracy we probably wouldn't have steam
thank you piracy
Can't say that HADOPI has been a rampant success, though.