Even if you could predict the future, it still wouldn't matter to me. Harming your own customers (who are definitely in a majority) to go after some (or even quite a few) 'pirates' is idiotic. It's a complete waste of time, as we've seen with DRM schemes.
I could start by pointing out that such foundations of scientific correctness are usually not requested when people state the opposite opinion than mine, i.e. "pirates don't harm the market". I could go on by noting that the researches you want to see take time and cost money, and the only ones who actually have interest in paying for them are the hollywood / game publishers, and when they *do* publish their results, which unsurprisingly show they're having huge damages because of piracy, they are simply ignored or not believed by the community.
People don't believe these so-called 'studies' because they aren't accurate. To be accurate, they would literally have to not only prove that each and every 'pirate' would have bought the product otherwise, but they'd also have to accurately determine exactly how many 'pirates' exist in the first place. Both of these are near impossible tasks with the latter being difficult merely because of the giant scope of the internet.
they evidently must have other instruments.
Then please, tell me this: what "instruments" are they using to find every single instance of 'piracy' present on the internet? That would indeed be an interesting piece of technology (no, looking at a few torrents isn't going to return an accurate result).
Since developing games tends to have a cost
Cost incurred by choice of the developers. That aside, even if you truly believe that 'pirates' harm developers, any action taken against legitimate customers by the developers would still be the fault of the developers (and the 'pirates', in this scenario).
So I'm effectively paying for letting them play.
You're paying for the product.
But as long as it is something more like "dumb people pay, smart people don't" you'll have a hard time convincing me it's ethical.
It's not that I don't agree with you that supporting developers is a good thing if you wish to see continued development, but I must mention that ethics are subjective.
PS3 game 'piracy'? If so, do you have any sources to back that up?
But when I go in shops and see that an original game costs as much as three days of work, while I know my friends are downloading the same game from torrents, I feel I'm being a bit exploited.
And why should this be blamed on 'piracy'? To the company itself, a 'pirate' is almost indistinguishable from someone who merely doesn't buy their product (in that neither grants them money). How exactly do we know who is a 'pirate' and who merely didn't buy the product (not counting anecdotal evidence, of course)? It's nearly impossible. Even spying on a few torrents won't accomplish anything. It's ridiculous to blame 'pirates' because corrupt corporations take actions that hurt the consumer based on unprovable assumptions.
Actually, the people they have to thank for it are paranoid imbeciles who would rather take away from their own customers than let a few cheaters/'pirates' slip by.
Had there been no hacking
But there was hacking. It was done by a few people. That does not justify completely ruining something for everyone.
You may not like cheaters. You may not like 'pirates'. You may think that they are both partly to blame. However, the one who harmed their own customers and removed the feature for everyone is also to blame.
Most those who argue with this
"Most"? Can you prove that?
One would have to be a complete moron to assume that hack such as this won't be used for piracy
Other people know and don't care. Not everyone feels the same way about 'piracy' as you (although that is irrelevant either way).
Making it available to the average joes just proves what your true intentions are.
To inform others about how you tinkered with your own property so that they could potentially get enjoyment out of your work?
keeping it and finding a key and making millions of copies of it - I doubt even this very sentence itself will compute in there... But whatever.
So it becomes bad when you share your methods with everyone else? The existence of a few cheaters in a video game should stop people from being able to publicly announce the methods they used to tinker with their own property?
Vote with your $$ - don't buy products you don't like.
This is a good idea, however. It's a shame that Sony won't go bankrupt (mostly due to the technologically illiterate or apathetic people who continue to buy their products). All you can do is try.
Did taking about that toaster or microwave to see how it worked enable people around the world to download free toast that someone else spent tons of time making?
That would be great! World hunger would be more or less solved. But that's bad because capitalism is obviously good (just like scarcity)!
Yeah! Police should bust down a PS3 hacker's door! They should really be wasting their time to 'ensure' that no one cheats in a multiplayer game. After all, cheating is 'bad' because some people don't like it. Like repeatedly using a certain powerful weapon in a game!
Well, I mean extremely obvious things. For instance, you probably don't need to tell what a function called "addition" does. Really, you should be using function and variable names that describe what is going on. If that's not possible, then resort to comments.
I generally don't comment my code if it's obvious what it is supposed to do. The question of "why" is usually fairly easy to figure out in those cases, as well, depending on the situation. I really dislike useless comments.
I can understand ceasing to buy their media in the future, but why must you stop downloading it, too? You're not giving them any money, and in almost all cases, they don't even know you exist.
There's a good reason for that. For some reason, humans are factually more important than every other species on the planet. I know this is true because humans say so (which is a total surprise)! So, who cares about other species? All that matters is jobs!
"Smart people" wouldn't try to ban something for everyone because of what a few idiots do. They're not "smart people," they're the average ignorant politicians.
Ah, I see. 100%. You should be working every single day possible (never take a day off), never take breaks (and despite of this, be completely focused), and live to work (not live to have fun). If not, you obviously have a sense of entitlement!
The solution is to leave people alone, not ruin something for everyone because of a few idiots. This really doesn't have much to do with non-technical. Even a complete imbecile should be able to see how poor of a 'solution' this is.
Why would any responsible parent not want to know what's going on on a computer that they have paid for - not to mention the home that the kid lives in and the food s/he eats.
Why would any responsible parent resort to such crude methods? Why would any responsible person have children if they don't have time to actually educate them and be by their side?
In spite of all the nonsense I've see in this thread, many well-meaning, well-brought-up kids do get into trouble on the Internet
Trouble? Such as? There are few things that cannot be solved through education. I don't mean secrecy. I mean education.
Do I want to know about that before a tragedy happens?
Don't let them leave the house, then. Ever. That is the only way to ensure a tragedy won't happen to the best of your ability. Bad things happen. Most of the time they aren't terrible.
Sorry, there's even good brain science that says judgment is "suspended" by most young brains, until their early 20's.
Most? I'd have taken your statement more seriously if you used "some," but you didn't. I'll need a citation that proves that most young people don't have any judgement. Sure, their brains are still developing, but people underestimate them far too often. Keeping them in a bubble will, however, only hurt them.
Keystroke your kid's computer; it's the right thing to do.
Be an actual parent by educating your child and being there for them. However, don't be a paranoid, overprotective idiot, either. If you don't have time to do that, don't have children. Very simple.
What im talking about is things like aimbots and wall hacks, the most prevalent and most annoying hacks in multiplayer gaming.
I know. Moderation.
What do you mean by 'most of the information'?
I meant player information. Health, items, armor, ammo, etc. Actually, I don't think aimbots and wallhacks are the worst possible hacks. It gets much worse if players are allowed to make themselves invincible, but that's besides the point.
But how do you do that, i mean why do you think it hasn't been done already?
What are you talking about? PC games do that all the time. Most of the information is stored server-side so that clients cannot alter it as they please. I mean, that won't exactly stop aimbots, but it gets rid of the most abusive cheats. Other than that, again, I say moderate the servers.
How so? Which game - aside from MMOs - has avoided rampant cheating?
Certainly not many. Designing your game so that it isn't terribly easy to hack was what I was referring to (like not storing everything clientside). Now, if the servers are properly moderated, it shouldn't be that bad. If it is, that's really the server owner's fault.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course PS3-specific piracy is still low
Even if you could predict the future, it still wouldn't matter to me. Harming your own customers (who are definitely in a majority) to go after some (or even quite a few) 'pirates' is idiotic. It's a complete waste of time, as we've seen with DRM schemes.
I could start by pointing out that such foundations of scientific correctness are usually not requested when people state the opposite opinion than mine, i.e. "pirates don't harm the market".
I could go on by noting that the researches you want to see take time and cost money, and the only ones who actually have interest in paying for them are the hollywood / game publishers, and when they *do* publish their results, which unsurprisingly show they're having huge damages because of piracy, they are simply ignored or not believed by the community.
People don't believe these so-called 'studies' because they aren't accurate. To be accurate, they would literally have to not only prove that each and every 'pirate' would have bought the product otherwise, but they'd also have to accurately determine exactly how many 'pirates' exist in the first place. Both of these are near impossible tasks with the latter being difficult merely because of the giant scope of the internet.
they evidently must have other instruments.
Then please, tell me this: what "instruments" are they using to find every single instance of 'piracy' present on the internet? That would indeed be an interesting piece of technology (no, looking at a few torrents isn't going to return an accurate result).
Since developing games tends to have a cost
Cost incurred by choice of the developers. That aside, even if you truly believe that 'pirates' harm developers, any action taken against legitimate customers by the developers would still be the fault of the developers (and the 'pirates', in this scenario).
So I'm effectively paying for letting them play.
You're paying for the product.
But as long as it is something more like "dumb people pay, smart people don't" you'll have a hard time convincing me it's ethical.
It's not that I don't agree with you that supporting developers is a good thing if you wish to see continued development, but I must mention that ethics are subjective.
But where I live, piracy is *massive*.
PS3 game 'piracy'? If so, do you have any sources to back that up?
But when I go in shops and see that an original game costs as much as three days of work, while I know my friends are downloading the same game from torrents, I feel I'm being a bit exploited.
And why should this be blamed on 'piracy'? To the company itself, a 'pirate' is almost indistinguishable from someone who merely doesn't buy their product (in that neither grants them money). How exactly do we know who is a 'pirate' and who merely didn't buy the product (not counting anecdotal evidence, of course)? It's nearly impossible. Even spying on a few torrents won't accomplish anything. It's ridiculous to blame 'pirates' because corrupt corporations take actions that hurt the consumer based on unprovable assumptions.
it only applies to government institutions
Who do you think Sony is attempting to convince to stop the people who talk about it?
So you have the hackers to thank for it.
Actually, the people they have to thank for it are paranoid imbeciles who would rather take away from their own customers than let a few cheaters/'pirates' slip by.
Had there been no hacking
But there was hacking. It was done by a few people. That does not justify completely ruining something for everyone.
You may not like cheaters. You may not like 'pirates'. You may think that they are both partly to blame. However, the one who harmed their own customers and removed the feature for everyone is also to blame.
Most those who argue with this
"Most"? Can you prove that?
One would have to be a complete moron to assume that hack such as this won't be used for piracy
Other people know and don't care. Not everyone feels the same way about 'piracy' as you (although that is irrelevant either way).
Making it available to the average joes just proves what your true intentions are.
To inform others about how you tinkered with your own property so that they could potentially get enjoyment out of your work?
tiny little communist mind
What?
keeping it and finding a key and making millions of copies of it - I doubt even this very sentence itself will compute in there... But whatever.
So it becomes bad when you share your methods with everyone else? The existence of a few cheaters in a video game should stop people from being able to publicly announce the methods they used to tinker with their own property?
Vote with your $$ - don't buy products you don't like.
This is a good idea, however. It's a shame that Sony won't go bankrupt (mostly due to the technologically illiterate or apathetic people who continue to buy their products). All you can do is try.
I do feel I'm damaged by piracy, because it makes honest users pay for the dishonest users' fun.
You're damaged by paranoid idiots who would rather harm their own customers than let a few 'pirates' slip by, not 'piracy'.
so that parents can make an informed decision
The sad fact of the matter is that most of them probably won't, anyway. "It'll turn them into murderers, so I'm not going to buy this!"
What does modifying something that you supposedly own have to do with stealing another person's property?
Did taking about that toaster or microwave to see how it worked enable people around the world to download free toast that someone else spent tons of time making?
That would be great! World hunger would be more or less solved. But that's bad because capitalism is obviously good (just like scarcity)!
Yeah! Police should bust down a PS3 hacker's door! They should really be wasting their time to 'ensure' that no one cheats in a multiplayer game. After all, cheating is 'bad' because some people don't like it. Like repeatedly using a certain powerful weapon in a game!
Do you prefer the government grants going to "studies" that "prove" how simulated violence leads to real violence?
I actually prefer neither one.
Well, I mean extremely obvious things. For instance, you probably don't need to tell what a function called "addition" does. Really, you should be using function and variable names that describe what is going on. If that's not possible, then resort to comments.
I generally don't comment my code if it's obvious what it is supposed to do. The question of "why" is usually fairly easy to figure out in those cases, as well, depending on the situation. I really dislike useless comments.
you talk about liking it
Solution: download it and don't talk about it to people who would actually buy it.
Also, if you boycott the bad guys, you are more likely to fill the void with products from the good guys.
You can do that, anyway. Don't buy products from the "bad guys," but buy products from the "good guys" to support them.
I can understand ceasing to buy their media in the future, but why must you stop downloading it, too? You're not giving them any money, and in almost all cases, they don't even know you exist.
There's a good reason for that. For some reason, humans are factually more important than every other species on the planet. I know this is true because humans say so (which is a total surprise)! So, who cares about other species? All that matters is jobs!
"Smart people" wouldn't try to ban something for everyone because of what a few idiots do. They're not "smart people," they're the average ignorant politicians.
Ah, I see. 100%. You should be working every single day possible (never take a day off), never take breaks (and despite of this, be completely focused), and live to work (not live to have fun). If not, you obviously have a sense of entitlement!
The solution is to leave people alone, not ruin something for everyone because of a few idiots. This really doesn't have much to do with non-technical. Even a complete imbecile should be able to see how poor of a 'solution' this is.
Why would any responsible parent not want to know what's going on on a computer that they have paid for - not to mention the home that the kid lives in and the food s/he eats.
Why would any responsible parent resort to such crude methods? Why would any responsible person have children if they don't have time to actually educate them and be by their side?
In spite of all the nonsense I've see in this thread, many well-meaning, well-brought-up kids do get into trouble on the Internet
Trouble? Such as? There are few things that cannot be solved through education. I don't mean secrecy. I mean education.
Do I want to know about that before a tragedy happens?
Don't let them leave the house, then. Ever. That is the only way to ensure a tragedy won't happen to the best of your ability. Bad things happen. Most of the time they aren't terrible.
Sorry, there's even good brain science that says judgment is "suspended" by most young brains, until their early 20's.
Most? I'd have taken your statement more seriously if you used "some," but you didn't. I'll need a citation that proves that most young people don't have any judgement. Sure, their brains are still developing, but people underestimate them far too often. Keeping them in a bubble will, however, only hurt them.
Keystroke your kid's computer; it's the right thing to do.
Be an actual parent by educating your child and being there for them. However, don't be a paranoid, overprotective idiot, either. If you don't have time to do that, don't have children. Very simple.
In the long run, yes.
Mission accomplished, then.
Then there's not much to be done. People will just have to deal with the occasional cheater.
What im talking about is things like aimbots and wall hacks, the most prevalent and most annoying hacks in multiplayer gaming.
I know. Moderation.
What do you mean by 'most of the information'?
I meant player information. Health, items, armor, ammo, etc. Actually, I don't think aimbots and wallhacks are the worst possible hacks. It gets much worse if players are allowed to make themselves invincible, but that's besides the point.
But how do you do that, i mean why do you think it hasn't been done already?
What are you talking about? PC games do that all the time. Most of the information is stored server-side so that clients cannot alter it as they please. I mean, that won't exactly stop aimbots, but it gets rid of the most abusive cheats. Other than that, again, I say moderate the servers.
How so? Which game - aside from MMOs - has avoided rampant cheating?
Certainly not many. Designing your game so that it isn't terribly easy to hack was what I was referring to (like not storing everything clientside). Now, if the servers are properly moderated, it shouldn't be that bad. If it is, that's really the server owner's fault.