There are lots of reasons to pirate stuff, but this argument in particular boils down to “We should steal stuff now because maybe some day in the future I won’t be able to use the paid version after they go out of business.” And that is shitty.
You bought it, so go crack it now that the license check is broken and nobody will care. That’s GOOD piracy. Support the creators, pirate when you can’t or it’s unreasonable to pay (more).
Don’t just pirate to mitigate theoretical future inconvenience. Do it to circumvent actual inconvenience, or to get things you couldn’t otherwise afford, or to say “fuck you” to big, shitty companies.
But pirating from a small-time dev just in case there are maybe license problems far in the future is not The Way
like I’ve had more than one super good YouTube video essay go missing, getting permanently pulled because of some copyright issue with a background shot or something, so I’ll actually add really good YouTube videos to my Plex library just in case as well
Totally. Though, that case can be a tiny bit tricky. Like, people should be allowed to remove stuff from the Internet that they’ve created if they want, but it should also be okay to archive content that may be abandoned or lost. Hard to create rules that differentiate the two effectively for enforcement
the specific ones I’m talking about, they were removed by YouTube and not at the creators behest. like one of them is about the three stooges and whoever owns The Three stooges material complained about some copyrighted material in the background horse shit
well it’s a really interesting concept. there’s really no other form of media where you could put something out there and then recall it somehow. like if you wrote a book that you didn’t like, there’s absolutely no legal way you could prevent people from reading it, etc. sort of ties into the Barbra Streisand effect
What’s interesting with the comparison to books is that you can stop it from being published. You can’t force people to give up the copy they already bought, but they can’t make more copies and distribute it.
Hard to draw that distinction in the digital world
And if you want a better comparison, though of YouTube like a drive-in theater. You’re not allowed to make a copy of the film with your camcorder and go distribute it.
it’s almost more of a philosophical question than a legal one. sure, maybe they can prevent you from recording the drive-in movie and showing it to other people, but would they have the moral authority to say that you couldn’t repeat the storyline to someone else?
let’s say someone produces some documentary that ends up containing some hideously embarrassing error. something that could really ruin some third party’s life. you pull the documentary from theaters, you pull it from streaming services, anybody who owns a copy owns it illegally. but, anybody who’s seen it, or heard it described, could sit down in front of an audience and act out the entire thing piece by piece, attributing the entire thing to the original producer’s name.
it ties into a line of thinking I had the other day when reading my credit card number to somebody over the phone. me talking to another person, giving them digit by digit, it was like two computers talking but we were people. if we had been computers, using a speaker and a microphone to communicate numbers in that way, we would have laughed at it and called it stone age technology, but that still how humans communicate with each other.
This gets into a weird debate about the difference between reproducing a thing and describing a thing. With sufficiently accurate description you can create a reproduction.
And when you take that into the realm of computing, where we’ve functionally automated the process of describing things with extreme accuracy it gets really blurry. But we can all agree that “take what you want, give nothing back” is not a good way to run a society, least of all an economy :D
So we’re left with the task of crafting internally consistent legislation that attempts to allow certain types of reproductions, but not others.
The thing is, this is the type of debate just should be happening at the administrative level, in Congress, etc. But instead, special interest groups and lobbyists are doing the legislating on this stuff.
Like, people should be allowed to remove stuff from the Internet that they’ve created if they want,
No, no they shouldn’t. This is antithetical to the generally good intention behind copyright.
The point was not to allow people to take away things they have created, but to permit them to profit in order that they might choose to make more, and be able to support their life in a capitalist system. These intentions are largely good.
Allowing people to take away what they have created is the opposite of this intent, and harmful to the public good, which benefits from as many works as possible being accessible to the public.
You misunderstand my meaning: they shouldn’t be able to go out and remove all copies of something in existence. But they should be able to limit distribution of the thing they created, up to and including stopping distribution.
Why? How is it better for society and people overall if they have the power to do this?
Allowing the creators to profit is understandable and necessary in our current system, but what benefit is gained for the public by them being permitted to stop distribution altogether?
If there is a benefit to the public and society that I am not seeing, then ok, but ‘they created it so they should control it’ is harmful to the people at large, and that should be prioritized over a creator’s ego or desire for control.
Because the right to determine distribution channels and the right to prevent distribution are inseparable. I challenge you to write a law that successfully implements one but not the other. Any law you write that guarantees a creator control over who distributes their work and how will inherently allow that creator to literally or functionally prevent distribution.
The alternative is saying that creators don’t have a right to control distribution at all - anyone must be allowed to reproduce and distribute, even if not for free - and that is a known disincentive to invention and economic growth; there’s a reason we only enforce that requirement in select places like standards and protocols
Yeah, I agree with you completely, indeed I just posted this as in a meme manner.
I love FKM and I paid for it even when it was clear the app wasn’t going to be updated that much, I usually don’t feel any kind of remorse while pirating, but now this is justified and that is good too.
Regardless this is a good reminder that this can happen anytime with any app or service, being a good or a bad one, having nice or asshole devs/teams behind, and for that piracy will always be a handy solution, I just wish that abandoned apps could somehow being open sourced automatically, but that is a dream.
“Deprive small indie devs of revenue because advertisers would get a cut” is a bad take. Support small developers or don’t use their product. If a small dev chooses to use a platform you don’t like then don’t use their product.
IMO piracy is only justified when it corrects for a problem. Doing it without consideration for who is being harmed isn’t cool.
If taking $1 from Google also means taking $5 from a small dev, you’re doing more harm than good
… You’re suggesting pirating a small dev’s app…to protest surveillance by the app store owner?
That’s not how it works. If you don’t like the policies of the store, then ask the dev to put it on another store. If they refuse, don’t use their product because they suck.
Choosing to limit your product to a shitty store is a developer choice. That gives you the right to not use their product, not the right to steal it. Otherwise, pay for it and then install a cracked version to remove the surveillance or whatever
Couldn’t agree more on it being a bad justification for piracy
Though if you bought it and the license check stops working later I’m not even sure I’d call patching it to work without the check piracy, it’s simply fixing something you own
Yeah you’re going to use the same tools but to me I don’t see it as piracy but simply a right to repair thing
Yeah, exactly. It’s the same reason I have little hesitance pirating a game I already have when the platform I have it on doesn’t support mods (looking at you, Xbox game pass)
In this regard it's about the ability to pirate, which always comes down to the classic "it's a service issue."
The need for pirating this software wouldn't exist if the license check wasn't broken, but since it is, it's now the only way to access it regardless of your ownership or not.
Or when I lived in a place with shit internet and I had games that needed an online handshake to play, I basically pirated every game that needed that check because I wouldn’t be able to play otherwise
I think if more people took that path, pirate only when you actually have a problem, much less content would be cracked and piratable.
Imagine OP and someone who is capable of cracking a software both bought and used this app, then 3 years later the app stops working. OP goes to look for a crack, but one doesn’t exist because the person who would have made it happened to stop using it before they had a need to crack it. So now OP is just boned.
So I say, always pirate everything and do so asap. And then obviously, if you want things to keep being produced, you should probably support the creators.
“I’m going to steal stuff because if I don’t then people who NEED to steal it won’t be able to” is some serious mental gymnastics.
Your argument only works for creating cracks, not consuming them. Absolutely create cracks even when they aren’t needed. But that’s not the same as using the crack even when you don’t need to, just because you can
Idk if you meant to, but you came across really rude. Anyway…
You’ve got a point about creating but not using the cracks, that does leave the question of when it’s ethical to release it. Immediately for those with region locks or whatever that prevents them from normally acquiring it? Wait till it’s no longer available anywhere? Try to region lock your crack?
Also my comment was not advocating for stealing, it was advocating for ensuring your ownership rights asap after purchase.
Our mortgage is $2600 month. My wife has a much better paying job than me. I make $2200 a month after taxes/deductions. She is currently going through cancer treatments and although everything is looking positive it really got me thinking about what the hell does life look like for my family if something happens to my wife?
I’ve had the same bus driving job for 23 years. I’m undereducated. A 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom apartment is $1600 month here. I don’t know how I’d ever be able to take care of myself and two kids.
They want us to have 80k+ in school debt so you can be allowed to have mortgage debt or rent and own nothing. I don’t know where I’m going with this but I’m just bummed out about life right now.
You literally beat me to this reply by like 4 minutes haha. Banks were giving variable mortgages to people who could barely afford current rates, they don’t give a shit.
I would never ever take an adjustable rate mortgage. That is just begging to get fucked. Like right now for example. My mortgage is like 4.2% but if it were an adjustable id be at like 6+% and be out of a house.
Probably make as much use of the scam mortgage insurance that they can too. I forget what it’s actually called but it’s a scam IMO. $100 a month baked into my escrow for insurance to the lender in case I lost the house. To my knowledge it provides me no benefit.
Upside is when I refinanced it was taken off. (Think the whole first time home owner program requires it for the initial loan.)
I’m in exactly the same boat as you. Undereducated, lower paying job than my wife, mortgage, etc. I’ve frequently had panicked thoughts about what I would do if she died. And we have a kid, which makes it even worse.
Part of the reason my partner and I don’t want kids. It’s almost impossible to raise them alone and she has a preexisting condition that she wouldn’t want to pass on to them. If she passes away I could always just go live in my car by the beach and be fine. Wouldn’t be able to do that very well with a kid.
Consider term life insurance? (Not whole life which is a ripoff.) It’s usually pretty cheap for a 20 year policy that’ll give you a few hundred grand if the worst happens. Like literally $20-$50/month. I’m not a salesman, don’t work in insurance, just a suggestion.
Yeah, if you’re in your 20s and reading this, and your healthy, get term life insurance now. Get it while it’s go out to dinner cheap. I’m 43 on medication due to congenital issues and mine is $350 PER MONTH!
You’ll be fine. Stop seeding the thing they don’t like and increase your security—VPN, seedbox, private trackers, etc. If anybody asks, you had an asshole neighbor kid who guessed your WiFi password.
Edit: just realized that you were using a server with Hetzner—Germany is one of the worst places for torrenting. Get a server in a friendlier country for that.
I’d take the $10 mil. Childhood seems like it would be a lot less fun if I had to go through it again but now with the jaded mind of a middle aged man.
I can for sure find a way to have fun with ten million dollars though 😉
10 mil is definitely easier, but if you memorized important global events and stock market crashes or explosions you could potentially build an empire. 10 mil would be chump change at that point. You could potentially maneuver yourself into positions of extreme power and help to shape the world, possibly change it for the better in the process.
True, but in this case I’d only be six years old. I’d be too young to really do anything about future events, and anyone who could do something probably wouldn’t listen to a kid warning then about politics and finance. Somehow I feel like by the time I’d be old enough to make any of that information useful I would have either forgotten a lot of it or ceased to care. I might choose differently if I was starting at age like 25 or 30 though
Well I would imagine my parents would pay attention to a 6 year old with the intellect and speech capability of a fully grown adult, especially once i tell them I can predict important future events and deliver a couple examples. Then I could ask them to create a trust fund and make it invest according to my foreknowledge. 25 years later and it’s a global empire with controlling shares in all major corporations.
Gotta somehow get seed money. Even investing your allowance would only get you a couple of thousand. You’re investing doesn’t really pay off until you’re old enough and rich enough to put real money in the game.
See my other comment on this. I’m fairly sure I could get my parents to listen, whom would then do the investing for me, with a lot more than just an allowance (kids can’t invest anyway).
but if you memorized important global events and stock market crashes or explosions you could potentially build an empire.
That is the thing when these kinds of topics appear, I totally would commit the same mistakes all over again, hence a boring childhood (I still think I’d go back though).
Yeah my childhood sucked, and knowing I’d have another 12 years of abuse with nobody taking me seriously because I’m a kid? No thanks. I could put $10mil to good use right now.
I’m really sorry to hear that you had to go through that, and you can tell me to fuck right off if you don’t want to think about it, but you got me wondering.
Do you think if you went back, you could use what you know today to prevent/avoid it and see how that changes your life?
I was gonna say the same. If I had to go back the only change I would make is avoiding the cops, school councilors, relatives, and judges I thought I could trust. Every attempt we made to get away from our mom made the beatings worse.
Thanks for sharing. I never went through anything like that, and it really says a lot that even with an adult mind, you wouldn’t know what you could do or want to risk trying. Hope you’re doing well now.
Might be different because my abuse was psychological and covert sexual rather than physical. But for me, the inner boundaries I’ve learned through therapy would make a world of a difference.
My parents weren’t monsters, they were flawed people doing what they thought was best… If I could go back and clearly assert myself and my needs? Especially with what I know now?
I’d take that deal.
Not too mention, I’m a programmer. I know every major advancement we’ve made in the past decades…If I designed a language in the early 00’s, I would be worshipped by all programmers. I could’ve made Uber when the iphone launched, and never took a dime in investments. I’d also jump forward AI tech by a couple decades - I could make the world unrecognizable. I’d be a household name, although I’d probably use a pseudonym
Plus, all of my friends would effectively be dead if I took the red pill.
My 30 year-old mind is not going to be able to get along with my friends when they were also six, and no grownups are going to want to be friends with me as a six year-old, besides pedophiles.
It’d be a very lonely few decades, and no amount of stock exchange billions are worth that for me.
It’s an optical illusion. The planes aren’t really that close together. The person who shot the video is using a telephoto lens and is zoomed way in. This compresses the space and flattens it out so it’s hard to judge distance. Also the plane in front is smaller than the one in the back which heightens the illusion. It’s a really cool shot!
Definitely the windows, but recent planes have gone with huge turbines so it’s not the most reliable tell. I don’t know Airbus well but the turbines on a 737-800 or Mac are pretty big compared to a - 300 or A320
It’s not as rare as you may think. I used to work at a weather service office located right near the end of one of the runways at IAD and it would happen a few times a day if the airport was busy and the winds were such that they were coming in from our side.
I remember in 1995-ish or something when I used the internet for the first time using the Netscape browser… And I was asking a friend if he had tried all the web sites yet. Just got a weird look back… :) I didn’t know what the internet was back then at first.
There are portals: docs.flatpak.org/en/…/desktop-integration.html#po… . they allow secure access to many features. Also any flatpak app still has access to a private app-specific filesystem, just not to the host.
Doesn’t work for all applications but for many sand boxing is possible without a loss of features.
No filesystem access for a flatpak app just means it cant read host system files on its own, without user permission. You can still give it files or directories of files through the file explorer for the app to work with, just that it’s much safer since it can only otherwise view files in its sandbox.
[…] aren’t there some folks who want flatpak/snap/appimage to basically replace traditional package managers?
There might be people who think that, but that isn’t realistic. Flatpak is a package manager for user facing apps, mostly gui apps.
The core system apps will still be installed by a system package manager. I.e rpm-ostree on immutable Fedora or transactional-update/zypper on OpenSUSE MicroOS.
Snap can do system apps and user facing apps and fully snap-based Ubuntu might come in the future.
But this won’t force people to use them. Traditional package managers will keep existing for system apps and maintainers will proabably keep their gui packages in the repos.
There’s Obfuscate, an image redactor, and Metadata Cleaner which is self-descriptive. Both works properly without any filesystem access at all, because they use the file picker portal to ask the user for the files to be processed.
Learned this hard while playing alien isolation, especially since my night vision has been going to shit. My eyes were watering while I was playing, it was so dark
What I found is that videogames, are usually tailored to the eyes of younger audiences. Young adults and teenagers. Typical “playing in dark room with only a screen illuminating” stuff.
As I grow older however, I found that I need my rooms lights to be turned on to be comfortably plsy, with my screens brightness turned up just slightly. I also much appreciate features that help with vision impairment despite having an otherwise perfectly fine working vision.
Theoretically, having multiple streaming platforms should be good, as it prevents a monopoly. Problem is, they all have monopolies, on specific shows. Choosing the streaming services you want isn’t about choosing the better product, but on which shows you have. All streaming shows should have all shows available. That’s the only way to properly decide which service is worth paying for
I mean, yeah. If I can watch Cartoon Network regardless of my cable provider, then I’m choosing them based on how well they provide for me that cable. They do good work, get reliable cables, fix outages quickly, are affordable, fucking great
This sounds like they have to compete for your money and produce better shows, which is good for consumers. You can subscribe to service X, watch the show you’re interested in, and unsubscribe. Netflix releases all episodes at once, with other platforms you can simply wait till the show ends before subscribing.
I don’t argue that you should do exactly that instead of pirating. But I don’t see why somebody should be subscribed to all these services.
Well my point is they wouldn’t be subscribed to all the services. They’d pick one. You wanna watch “Show A”. None of these platforms are allowed to have exclusivity rights to it. So do you choose Netflix? Hulu? Amazon? It’s up to you, since you don’t have to choose only the one that has it. Now your decision to give money to Netflix, for example, is based on the fact that the service they’re providing–UI, ease of access, streaming speed–instead of them being the only ones who have “Show A”
You could implement this for some shows and movies, but there’s one big problem. Disney shouldn’t have exclusivity rights to their own IPs? Netflix should have to give everyone else the shows they pay for and produce?
I get where you’re coming from in theory, but in practice it doesn’t make sense. It would be like saying Nintendo must release their games on xbox and playstation.
My issue is that Disney should then not have its own streaming platform, and that, yeah, Netflix shouldn’t make its own shows
Now as for the videogame comparison, I’ve heard it before, but developing for different consoles is not the same. Making a game for switch hardware, and for xbox hardware requires multiple versions of the game. You don’t film multiple versions of a movie for different platforms. It’s part of why I don’t think all games should be available on all platforms. I believe that they shouldn’t have to be on all platforms, and that it should be up to developers which consoles to make games for, but yeah, that means that there are gonna be exclusivity deals. Would be nice to avoid, so that if Fromsoft decides to make BB2, they have the free reign to make it for PC, but my point is that game development is more complicated than movie streaming
Anyway, yeah, I think Disney+ can go fuck itself right back from the muck it crawled out of, and that Netflix has to stop making its own stuff (Or allow competitors to use it)
They’re a publisher whose content is hosted on their own streaming service. It’s classic vertical integration.
I think the current model is better actually, because then the streaming services have to compete with each other on content, user experience, and price.
This way, you only need to subscribe to the streaming services that have the shows you’re currently watching, and can cancel whenever you’re done with those shows, until the next one comes along.
If a streaming service bundles multiple studios shows together, then you’re paying for a ton of content you may not even care about, just like how cable is.
At the end of the day, unless someone is watching hours and hours of tv a day, it’s unlikely they need to simultaneously subscribe to 7 streaming services.
A streaming service’s product is the service of streaming stuff to you. It’s not a studio. Studios make those products. The streaming services give you a platform to watch them. Their product is their website
Woah there! Having the privilege to choose a streaming service that has a show you want. Those are some bold assumptions. We over here at anime land have former illegal streaming services with exclusive global licenses, even though they only operate nationally. Pirates overseas can’t watch their favorite anime of the season legally. They must either use a VPN to pay for a service that’ll ban them for VPN usage, or pirate the anime.
Exactly right! Maybe the EU will save us all. It seems somehow monopolistic that Disney+ is the exclusive official streaming service for so much. I guess this is why Netflix put so much into Netflix originals.
I’d like to at least see some requirements for open licensing of shows, such as maybe a sunset period or something.
This is rooted in the early days of cinema, in which theaters were also owned by the studios, and so would only show the stuff the studio produced. Was gonna go into it in my comment, but decided against it to keep it short. Another commenter also mentioned it, and that’s pretty much what I’m proposing. I’m suggesting specifically that they have to show everything in order to also avoid exclusivity deals. Part of that, though, would also be to just not let Netflix produce its own content, but if it didn’t, you’d be able to watch it on amazon anyway
Well a well written law would be able to deal with that, but even if my idea had a chance of becoming law, its final text probably would be loopholed to death unfortunately
lemmy.world has a mental health community that used to not allow posts mentioning suicide. Yes, a mental health community. Like wtf man. They only changed the rules because I made a meme criticizing that rule.
you dont even need adobe, if the statements are in a web page just use inspect element. Then technically the screenshot would be real until you reloaded the page
I remember the first time I ever saw that video was when I tried playing Enter the Gungeon. I didn’t even pirate it. I just screwed up when I was installing some mods lol
Yup. Adobe may not be the ones causing the housing crisis, but all this nickel and diming from other sources is part of the problem too.
Hey Adobe, if you want people to stop pirating your shit go back to a pay-once model or lower your subscription costs. Then maybe use some of that money you’ve got to help us out over here so we can afford to pay you.
i.imgur.com
Top