I also agree that you can not legally justify downloading a movie/game without reimbursing anyone for it (or getting permission from the creators to have it for free).
The justify part comes in when people point out the laws are wrong.
No physical evidence can disprove (or prove, for that matter) the existence of a metaphysical entity. If one chooses not to believe in the realm of metaphysics that is his prerogative, but that decision cannot (rightly) be based on physical evidence.
Wow - you can't proove unprovable things - nice work there sparky.
I've warezed stuff in the past to avoid paying for it. I freely admit it.
Officer! He's over here!
I won't wrap myself in a cloak of intellectual dishonesty and claim that I warezed it out of some social protest or civil disobedience. It was simply the case that I wanted the software, would rather not pay for it, so I warezed it.
There is a difference between a program one would like and something one needs. If the choice had been between buying it and doing without, your claim is that every program you download is something you would have bought otherwise? I don't believe it for a moment. But then the tone of your message suggest propaganda, more than truth.
I can't be the only one who's done this
False syllogism.
Happens all the time.
No actually it doesn't.
Long ago I worked minimum wage at a KFC. Then I went to college
We are not talking about what kids did before they got an education.
Again, I can't be the only one. Hope this helps.
Again false syllogism. I.e., what you did or didn't do does not prove anything. So NO just because you did something it doesn't mean or logically follow anyone else has done it. Hope that it explained it in a way you could understand.
Someone unlawfully distributing software like this is negatively affecting the economy and social structure of the United States of America.
Except this just your postulate, you have shown no proof.
And I will postulate the opposite: It has no effect on the economy and social structure: Its only downloaded by two groups: people who are curious but who wouldn't want to buy it if that was the only way to get it (they would then do without) or people who couldn't afford to buy it anyway.
The United States economy has for a large number of people become an intellectual property economy. Many people don't want to go back to the days where they had to toil in factories for minimum wage
You haven't shown proof that anyone has actually gone from toiling in a factory on minimum wage to suddenly producing "intellectual property" so we'll assume nobody actually have and you just made it up. However it does seem likely that a lot of people want a job where you just have to do the work ONCE and then can keep raking it in over and over and over - those without morals probably dream about that.
Anyway, people like this--whether they are distibuting for profit or not--are undermining the economy of the United States and we will not allow that to happen.
If you want "free software", use free software that's really free.
So your argument is that if someone downloads a program he hurts the economy but if he uses free software he doesn't? Since this appears to be utter nonsense you will be hard pressed to show why this is not so.
I agree, it doesn't have some of Photoshop's features, but we need to stop complaining about the UI.
Sure, as soon as they change it or you lot stop trying to pretend its so great everybody else should be forced to use it.
As I see it, we shouldn't try to convert the professional full-time users of Photoshop, but rather the people who pirate it. Piracy is a bigger threat to Free Software than it is to entrenched industry standard software, IMO.
Ie, when you can't pirate a program with a good interface you are stuck with a free program with a bad one?
and stop modding everything which is just the tiniest bit critical of linux down.
Even Photoshop never used that clunky interface originally. The Photoshop MDI originated from the fact that on the Macintosh, Photoshop looked a lot more like the GIMP -- except that the menubar was on top, mac-related stuff, etc. However, the Photoshop programming team didn't want to figure out how to do that on Windows, so they simply made a "container window" to hold everything.
Interesting anecdote, but doesn't change the fact that some of us, me included, prefer to have windows in a "container" window as opposed to spread all over the desktop (perhaps because we are able to multitask;)
Slashdot Mirror
I mean they can't demand people pay for it and call it illegal at the same time, right?
... also block it in the firewall. When WMP wants to visit the web I tell it to drop dead.
Except they haven't give you the right to have a copy.
all these claim a global flood for which there is evidence
You wanna convince people of something you need to do better than quote religious propaganda sites.
I also agree that you can not legally justify downloading a movie/game without reimbursing anyone for it (or getting permission from the creators to have it for free).
The justify part comes in when people point out the laws are wrong.
And because anybody who has children only got them to practice child pron, cameras should be installed in all houses right?
If cloning a human embryo is equal to cloning a human,
It isn't. Its eual to cloning an embryo.
No physical evidence can disprove (or prove, for that matter) the existence of a metaphysical entity. If one chooses not to believe in the realm of metaphysics that is his prerogative, but that decision cannot (rightly) be based on physical evidence.
Wow - you can't proove unprovable things - nice work there sparky.
One notices that some people have started to post trackers on usenet; alt.binaries.torrents
It's not "piracy"; it's copying without permission. If you sell copied films, then you're a pirate.
No, if you attack and board ships - then you are a pirate.
Whining because people would
.sig. Oh, the irony.
He was not whining, he was stating an opinion.
prefer donating to something that directly affects them while having a pyramid scheme link in your
No irony - the two things are not related.
The strategy is the same as if you were to sue Google for providing links to torrent files
No, because the point of Google isn't to facilitate copyright infringement, lokitorrent has no other use.
I've warezed stuff in the past to avoid paying for it. I freely admit it.
Officer! He's over here!
I won't wrap myself in a cloak of intellectual dishonesty and claim that I warezed it out of some social protest or civil disobedience. It was simply the case that I wanted the software, would rather not pay for it, so I warezed it.
There is a difference between a program one would like and something one needs. If the choice had been between buying it and doing without, your claim is that every program you download is something you would have bought otherwise? I don't believe it for a moment. But then the tone of your message suggest propaganda, more than truth.
I can't be the only one who's done this
False syllogism.
Happens all the time.
No actually it doesn't.
Long ago I worked minimum wage at a KFC. Then I went to college
We are not talking about what kids did before they got an education.
Again, I can't be the only one. Hope this helps.
Again false syllogism. I.e., what you did or didn't do does not prove anything. So NO just because you did something it doesn't mean or logically follow anyone else has done it. Hope that it explained it in a way you could understand.
If it can't be proven, they don't. Love leaves proof.
So essentially the Indiscriminator is a violent thug who beats up people?
Someone unlawfully distributing software like this is negatively affecting the economy and social structure of the United States of America.
Except this just your postulate, you have shown no proof.
And I will postulate the opposite: It has no effect on the economy and social structure: Its only downloaded by two groups: people who are curious but who wouldn't want to buy it if that was the only way to get it (they would then do without) or people who couldn't afford to buy it anyway.
The United States economy has for a large number of people become an intellectual property economy. Many people don't want to go back to the days where they had to toil in factories for minimum wage
You haven't shown proof that anyone has actually gone from toiling in a factory on minimum wage to suddenly producing "intellectual property" so we'll assume nobody actually have and you just made it up. However it does seem likely that a lot of people want a job where you just have to do the work ONCE and then can keep raking it in over and over and over - those without morals probably dream about that.
Anyway, people like this--whether they are distibuting for profit or not--are undermining the economy of the United States and we will not allow that to happen.
If you want "free software", use free software that's really free.
So your argument is that if someone downloads a program he hurts the economy but if he uses free software he doesn't? Since this appears to be utter nonsense you will be hard pressed to show why this is not so.
Perhaps their educations also told them that "lose" can mean:
"to fail to keep, sustain, or maintain"
Except that he didn't lack it - go read his web page
He lacked the talent to pull of the cool concept - which would be to control the lights via the internet. Everybody is clear he faked it.
Just a pity it takes up so much space ('so much' is a subjective measurement) especially since you can make programs that run without it.
Looking at those screens shots its like being back in the 1970ies *g*
I agree, it doesn't have some of Photoshop's features, but we need to stop complaining about the UI.
Sure, as soon as they change it or you lot stop trying to pretend its so great everybody else should be forced to use it.
As I see it, we shouldn't try to convert the professional full-time users of Photoshop, but rather the people who pirate it. Piracy is a bigger threat to Free Software than it is to entrenched industry standard software, IMO.
Ie, when you can't pirate a program with a good interface you are stuck with a free program with a bad one?
and stop modding everything which is just the tiniest bit critical of linux down.
;)
Even Photoshop never used that clunky interface originally. The Photoshop MDI originated from the fact that on the Macintosh, Photoshop looked a lot more like the GIMP -- except that the menubar was on top, mac-related stuff, etc. However, the Photoshop programming team didn't want to figure out how to do that on Windows, so they simply made a "container window" to hold everything.
Interesting anecdote, but doesn't change the fact that some of us, me included, prefer to have windows in a "container" window as opposed to spread all over the desktop (perhaps because we are able to multitask
For one thing you lock the "menu" on the left in a very small font, which is hard to read for some of us ...
how about http://www.legaltorrents.com/ URL says it all...
;)
Yep, its a place where you can download legal notices without the bother of having them mailed to you first
World of Warcraft by Blizzard utilizes the BitTorrent methods to distribute patches/updates.
Don't i know it, that's why it takes forever to get anything... (if you have capped upload rates you are genrally fucked)