They should just look at how many times the pirates listened to each song, and base the fine on the prevailing streaming rate to artists. Then the damages will calculate to like $5. Or if you really want to make them hurt look at how long they had the files and charge them the streaming subscription rate for like 3 years, then they may owe hundreds of dollars.
Portal 2 is only two player, but it’s my favorite game and it has a co-op mode with puzzles that require both people.
Self hosting is glorious when it works, and a bit frustrating when it doesn’t. I’m using Emby, and I just finished upgrading from an arm 32-bit, to an Intel N300. It was working great until I relocated the new server to a different location. On boot the USB hard drive was just barely working but super slow. Not sure what the issue was, but it’s working after changing USB ports.
I have no hate for vegans. But I am also intolerant of bigotry. There’s more than enough of it coming from the religious right. I don’t need any more of it from the zealous left.
I’m quite sincere. I used to drive my car in a hurry for years. It’s no way to live. I caused myself a lot of unnecessary stress. At the time of course I blamed my stress on all the slow, distracted shitheads. But they’re infinite, and out of my control. But one thing is in my control: how I react. I made a decision one day that I would never drive in a hurry. That it would take how long it takes. It’s been a lot better since then.
Just like the shitheads on the road, you will find no short supply of people who don’t share your world view. If they upset you, it’s a rough road ahead. I hope you find peace. ☮︎
They don’t require rebuttal because they weren’t related to the original statement, and actually only serve to reinforce it along with the rest of this brigade.
The question is why do people hate media pirates and I made a comparison to vegans hating omnivores. That it’s a moral high road and those on the high road spew shit down to those who aren’t on it. The only logical rebuttal to that point would be a bunch of vegans saying “whoa hey that’s not fair, I don’t hate anybody else for their choices”. And I’m sure those people are out there and to them I apologize for the generalization.
Whoosh. Clearly I lack the reading comprehension to understand. I just need to look at the facts harder and then I’ll become vegan.
And, it seems from the response that it was a spot on analogy.
Thank you for the very detailed response. This is a discussion about piracy. It’s interesting to speak of coping and projection. You know a lot of the most hateful homophobes keep coming out of the closet as gay? I think this kind of hate is very prevalent in our society. Basically you hate that somebody who doesn’t share your moral restrictions, who is out there enjoying life without a care in the world. A kind of moral jealousy. “I have to live with this burden and it’s unfair for somebody else to live without it”. I said it in my original comment and now I will emphasize it in response to your wall of text. Your contempt for me is the same as closet gay homophobes. In this analogy my love for cheese is gay sex, and you think you hate it because your religion (your moral code) is correct, but you actually hate it because you are deprived of it, and it’s unfair that I can enjoy it without guilt. This brings us full circle to the original question about why I think some people view piracy negatively.
It seems you think that all non-vegans must be ignorant. “If only 90% of the population would read the scientific literature or if they were aware of how their animal products came to market, they’d all be vegan”. I am aware of the indirect consequences of my actions and I carry on so I must be some kind of monster. Clearly I am not your brother in Christ, rather a spawn of Satan or perhaps worse. Perhaps I’m just a creature of this earth. A natural consequence of everything up until now.
It is absolutely futile. Being a vegan is like recycling. If it makes you feel better about your life, good. But anybody with the privilege to debate such things, with the worldwide industrial grocery selection to even contemplate veganism, has a huge wake of environmental destruction associated with existing. All the fuel that’s been burned, all of the lumber, loss of habitat for your dwelling. Every time you bathe a freshwater fish or amphibian dries up. Don’t worry about it. I forgive you. It’s not your fault. It’s not your burden. You are a worthy allocation of this planets resources. Thank you for your insight.
I am sorry your world view is causing you anguish.
Insects, crustaceans, and mollusks do not have any form of consciousness. They are just as aware and alive as fungi and plants. Otherwise we would feel great remorse when examining all the slaughtered insects on the front of our motor vehicles. Fish, are slightly more aware, but I don’t attach much emotional weight to their very tiny brains. Birds and mammals are on a higher level of consciousness than a lot of the animal kingdom. But not all death is painful. Many humans seek a dignified and painless death.
Domesticated animals for the most part have the ability to escape, if they wanted to express their consciousness and free will. The process of domestication is an evolutionary choice. Chickens and other livestock are suffering today because their ancestors gave away their freedom for security.
Actually I think dogs collectively suffer more than most of our livestock. For them, death is out of reach. Their suffering is prolonged. Their mutations and genetic deficiencies are cruel. Many dogs are born with such horrible genes and behaviors they have no hope of a quality life with humans. Very sad.
Anyway, there is no objective truth on this matter. But I know you care so much about suffering, I just want to reassure you, that I feel no sorrow for livestock. Everything we eat and purchase impacts the animals on this planet. To exist is to impose suffering on the Earth. And I’m okay with that. My opinion, is that vegans are drawing a line in sand so feint that it is erased by the slightest breeze.
There’s no projection. I feel no guilt for eating the diet of every single one of my ancestors. Zero. I do not believe animals to be sentient, and I do not equate death or servitude with suffering. It’s not that I don’t understand vegans. I do. But it’s like a religion - you have a fundamental belief, not in god, but in the consciousness of animals. Because we differ on that fundamental belief, we can reach no understanding about the ethics beyond that.
And I think it is a fair comparison. People who pay for media may also see it as an ethical baseline to pay for what you consume. And in both the case of vegans, and those who pay for streaming, the perceived benefit of that choice is in my opinion fundamentally flawed. But it’s really not a big deal to me. I was just trying to answer OPs question. I think your response only validates my analogy. Thank you.
It’s because they are paying money for something and you’re getting a better deal. See that’s not fair. Same reason vegans hate on omnivores - they’ve taken the high road and the benefits are small while the cost is high. They tell themselves that their money is going to the artists. And if you believe that, then piracy is harming artists in a very direct way.
It’s simply a service problem. NFL offers great streaming for those abroad because they don’t have exclusive deals with networks. If you want to watch NFL you need numerous subscriptions, and hope you don’t live in the wrong area.
Ideally it would be set up in Lemmy so that a post could remain but the author can be detached from it, and all comments.
BaconBits was a Reddit tracker with a maximum user count around 6000. They eventually closed because most of the users could get the same content from other trackers, with better choices about bitrate or codec, or better seeding. I’m not convinced Lemmy has enough users to support a private tracker, I think you need like 20k active users to be worthwhile.
I was alarmed most by part B:
(B)The seller provides to the consumer before executing each transaction a clear and conspicuous statement that does both of the following:
(i)States in plain language that buying or purchasing the digital good is a license.
(ii)Includes a hyperlink, QR code, or similar method to access the terms and conditions that provide full details on the license.
The way I’m reading that it’s just going to say something like: “Attention, you access to this game which can be revoked or abandoned at any time. For more information follow this link and read the license. Press here to continue your purchase.” Nobody will read it.
Not exactly accurate. The button can still say Buy. The law says that they have to get extra acknowledgment from the buyer that they actually mean license. So it will say buy, and then it will pop up and say you aren’t buying the game, only a license, and then you have to click ok I understand. More nags. What we really need is another license agreement to pop up that nobody reads.
Paywalled specifications sounds a lot like security through obscurity. It works well until it doesn’t.
When corporations steal from their employees by wage theft, they are penalized “double damages” or twice what they stole. Seems that would be reasonable to apply to this.