"DRM doesn't work" Not in this particular example, but it does it every other example known to man.
"It's the evil DRM that causes people to pirate" Sometimes, it is. Not all the time, though. Some people simply don't buy or pirate the game because they heard it would have DRM on it, and knowing it usually restricts what they can do with their own product, they decide not to buy it. Some people get angry that their most looked forward to game is going to have annoying DRM on it, and decide that they will pirate it since the pirated version will obviously be DRM-free.
"It's the price that makes people pirate" Again, sometimes it actually is.
"It's the quality of the game that makes people pirate" Sometimes.
"It's the lack of demos that makes people pirate" Sometimes.
"Piracy is just a trial! I'm sure after a month of playing, people are sure to go out and buy the game when it finally comes on sale!" Sometimes.
"Piracy is good for sales! Why, all the people who pirated are sure to tell their friends how great a game this is. And I'm sure those friends would be more than happy to wait a month to buy the game, rather than just pirate it like their good friend did, because these people don't deserve free games like their pirate friend does!" Sometimes. Maybe their friends are like you.
If you decide to spout anti-piracy idiocy at me, go read my previous replies first to find out why the "potential profit" argument holds no ground.
Debunked? I'd say I've already debunked the anti-piracy arguments.
What are pirates stealing, exactly? Certainly not the product itself, as they have to take something in order for it to be stealing. They've copied it.
However, due to the fact that they haven't actually stolen the product itself, but copied it, the only conclusion that remains is that they've 'stolen' potential, currently non-existent profit. If this act was illegal, however, everyone would be guilty of doing this. Competition between businesses would be illegal, due to the fact that customers might decide to go to one business to buy a product instead of going to another business, which, under the "potential profit" logic, would mean the first business stole potential/future profit from the second business. Not to mention the fact that informing consumers about a bad company/poorly made product would also be illegal, due to the fact that it could scare away potential customers of the company, thereby depriving them of potential/future profit. Also, people who just didn't buy the product would be as bad as pirates in the eyes of the business. They have no way of knowing who is a pirate and who isn't. If these 'normal' people would have bought their product, they would have had more money, which, since they didn't, means that they have deprived the business of future profit. The entire "potential profit" argument is illogical and holds zero ground.
It's also foolish to assume that everyone who pirated a product would have bought it had it not been available to pirate.
Our capitalistic ways are starting to show their age more and more as each day passes, and people are defending them to the death, even when it's illogical and hypocritical to do so.
Perhaps when you grow up, you'll learn to read my previous replies.
"you arent getting any bonus" Correlation = causation. Nice.
"immature bullshit this 'information wants to be free' meme was" I plan to be a software programmer myself, but I absolutely refuse to support idiotic practices like the anti-piracy movement for personal gain. Yes, gain. I'm not going to type out everything I already said above. Go read my previous sarcastic replies to find out how idiotic this anti-piracy bullshit is, and why our society is in need of some actual change.
Hilarious reply. Good job! I hate those pirates, too.
"by banning those whining 13 yr olds" Actually, I'd like to see them ban any whining person, regardless of age. I've heard full-grown adults screaming over losing a game. It's pretty sad.
I didn't say that they weren't humans. It means it isn't aware that you're killing it. The leech comment was obviously meant to remark on the fact that until the fetus is out of the body, it's just leeching off of the mother. Once it's out of the mothers body, the mother has the option of giving it away. At this point, its pretty much aware of its own existence and it isn't really forcefully leeching off of someones body. It's the choice of the women to be able to get an abortion.
What? That human is already born and aware of its existence. The fetus is basically an annoying parasite that isn't even aware of its existence until it is born, leeching off of the women. If she wants to get rid of it, that's her own business. The world is flooded with overpopulation and orphans, yet most of these same people that preach that abortion is wrong aren't adopting children that need homes themselves. Do you really want to see more? Overpopulation affects more than just humans.
If they aren't using the same name, they should deal with it. Are they using Facebook? No? Then I don't see any harm. If the judge rules in the favor of Facebook (since Facebook is a big company, they most likely will), then something is truly wrong with the way things are being done. If people can't make the distinction between two separate names, then that's no fault of a website.
Besides, "book" is a very, very common word. It's idiotic that they think that they can stop people from using it in a website name after a generic word or something.
I was just trying to say that, potentially, sperm could contribute to the creation of a human. If it's okay to basically waste the sperm, they why do some people have such objections to abortion? It isn't even aware of its own existence and can hardly be called anything but a potential human.
"The embryo is a human" The sperm cell has a chance to contribute to the creation of a human being. You aren't even giving that potential human being a chance by masturbating. Also, these embryo have almost zero chance of actually growing. They'll just go to waste if they aren't used, so they might as well be used for something useful. I don't see the problem with funding it at all. It's not as if they're forcefully taking them directly from pregnant women.
"It doesn't have the same implications at all" What implications does 'killing' an embryo that won't ever be allowed to grow anyway have?
"but that's not the same thing as killing anything" Uh, if something is living, and you take away its life, you killed it. It doesn't matter if it's a plant or a sperm cell.
Yet, given the right circumstances, they still have a chance to become a human. If this isn't a problem, then neither is using an embryo that isn't going to ever going to be allowed to grow, anyway. They are just cells.
The sperm would become a 'human' if it were allowed to be united with an egg. I considered that a potential human, and I consider it murder. You're not even giving the poor things a chance.
But by masturbating, you're essentially decreasing that chance to zero, and not even giving it a chance. It could be considered a potential child being thrown away by using the logic seen in comments above. Not all pregnancies are guaranteed to be successful, either.
Seriously? It was pretty obvious what I was talking about. Or should have been. Masturbation almost has zero chance of conceiving a child. While, obviously, the sperm cell by itself can't become a child, by masturbating, you're basically ensuring it never even has a chance of uniting with an egg, which could be considered wasteful. You're not even giving it a chance.
When someone goes to one business to buy a product instead of going to another business, the first business has stolen potential profit away from the other business because the second business would have had more money if the person went to buy the product there, instead. It relates to the "potential profit" thing. Which pirates are clearly stealing, because they certainly aren't stealing anything else.
I know. How many times do I have to state that I do not condone piracy? The fact that some people actually think that it's acceptable to steal something that is in an infinite quantity and deprive the author of future profit brings my blood to a boil. Like competition between businesses where one business is always stealing potential profit from another business.
Though, reading your comment has made me realize something: I'm stealing the potential profit of these businesses simply because I didn't buy their products. If I had bought them, they'd have more money, which means I stole some of their potential, future profit. They invested money into these products expecting to make money in return, and I had the gall not to buy every single one of their products, thereby depriving them of future profit. Much like pirates and competition between businesses.
I'll be back later after I've bought every product in existence.
What are you talking about, friend? You're the one being thick. You support the theft of non-existent (future) profit by supporting competition. You might as well support piracy. Some businesses think they have the right to steal customers (thereby likely stealing future profit away from other businesses) away from other businesses. This is absurd. You should do your part to help stop the theft of future profits.
"And there are no such practices, sorry to burst your bubble."
Sure there is. Do you believe that a child could be conceived if you masturbated without a women nearby? It has no reasonable chance of doing so, and it's basically just risking a potential babies life. A human life, might I add.
"I might as well say that you have to justify allowing parents to kill dependent children, that until they can survive on their own (age of maturity), they aren't real people. Heck, if you leave a baby alone with canned food and a can opener, the baby will starve. Stupid baby."
Except in that case they're capable of comprehending that they exist and aren't leeching off of someones body.
Agreed. Wait, you pirated music? What kind of evil person would do such a thing? Oh, wait, a pirate. Your comment was looking good until you mentioned that, but now I see that you're nothing more than a hypocrite. I bet you don't even have anything against piracy. Let me guess, you also think that when one business steals future profit from another business by luring in a customer that had thought about going to the other business is fine. You support thieves who steal potential profit. For shame.
Slashdot Mirror
If this is true, I must have a severe risk of dying. I sit around twelve hours a day, or so. Damn!
Oh, please. The "potential profit" argument used most by us piracy haters destroys any arguments you pirates have, clearly.
"DRM doesn't work"
Not in this particular example, but it does it every other example known to man.
"It's the evil DRM that causes people to pirate"
Sometimes, it is. Not all the time, though. Some people simply don't buy or pirate the game because they heard it would have DRM on it, and knowing it usually restricts what they can do with their own product, they decide not to buy it. Some people get angry that their most looked forward to game is going to have annoying DRM on it, and decide that they will pirate it since the pirated version will obviously be DRM-free.
"It's the price that makes people pirate"
Again, sometimes it actually is.
"It's the quality of the game that makes people pirate"
Sometimes.
"It's the lack of demos that makes people pirate"
Sometimes.
"Piracy is just a trial! I'm sure after a month of playing, people are sure to go out and buy the game when it finally comes on sale!"
Sometimes.
"Piracy is good for sales! Why, all the people who pirated are sure to tell their friends how great a game this is. And I'm sure those friends would be more than happy to wait a month to buy the game, rather than just pirate it like their good friend did, because these people don't deserve free games like their pirate friend does!"
Sometimes. Maybe their friends are like you.
If you decide to spout anti-piracy idiocy at me, go read my previous replies first to find out why the "potential profit" argument holds no ground.
Debunked? I'd say I've already debunked the anti-piracy arguments.
What are pirates stealing, exactly? Certainly not the product itself, as they have to take something in order for it to be stealing. They've copied it.
However, due to the fact that they haven't actually stolen the product itself, but copied it, the only conclusion that remains is that they've 'stolen' potential, currently non-existent profit. If this act was illegal, however, everyone would be guilty of doing this. Competition between businesses would be illegal, due to the fact that customers might decide to go to one business to buy a product instead of going to another business, which, under the "potential profit" logic, would mean the first business stole potential/future profit from the second business. Not to mention the fact that informing consumers about a bad company/poorly made product would also be illegal, due to the fact that it could scare away potential customers of the company, thereby depriving them of potential/future profit. Also, people who just didn't buy the product would be as bad as pirates in the eyes of the business. They have no way of knowing who is a pirate and who isn't. If these 'normal' people would have bought their product, they would have had more money, which, since they didn't, means that they have deprived the business of future profit. The entire "potential profit" argument is illogical and holds zero ground.
It's also foolish to assume that everyone who pirated a product would have bought it had it not been available to pirate.
Our capitalistic ways are starting to show their age more and more as each day passes, and people are defending them to the death, even when it's illogical and hypocritical to do so.
Perhaps when you grow up, you'll learn to read my previous replies.
"you arent getting any bonus"
Correlation = causation. Nice.
"immature bullshit this 'information wants to be free' meme was"
I plan to be a software programmer myself, but I absolutely refuse to support idiotic practices like the anti-piracy movement for personal gain. Yes, gain. I'm not going to type out everything I already said above. Go read my previous sarcastic replies to find out how idiotic this anti-piracy bullshit is, and why our society is in need of some actual change.
Hilarious reply. Good job! I hate those pirates, too.
"by banning those whining 13 yr olds"
Actually, I'd like to see them ban any whining person, regardless of age. I've heard full-grown adults screaming over losing a game. It's pretty sad.
I didn't say that they weren't humans. It means it isn't aware that you're killing it. The leech comment was obviously meant to remark on the fact that until the fetus is out of the body, it's just leeching off of the mother. Once it's out of the mothers body, the mother has the option of giving it away. At this point, its pretty much aware of its own existence and it isn't really forcefully leeching off of someones body. It's the choice of the women to be able to get an abortion.
What? That human is already born and aware of its existence. The fetus is basically an annoying parasite that isn't even aware of its existence until it is born, leeching off of the women. If she wants to get rid of it, that's her own business. The world is flooded with overpopulation and orphans, yet most of these same people that preach that abortion is wrong aren't adopting children that need homes themselves. Do you really want to see more? Overpopulation affects more than just humans.
If they aren't using the same name, they should deal with it. Are they using Facebook? No? Then I don't see any harm. If the judge rules in the favor of Facebook (since Facebook is a big company, they most likely will), then something is truly wrong with the way things are being done. If people can't make the distinction between two separate names, then that's no fault of a website.
Besides, "book" is a very, very common word. It's idiotic that they think that they can stop people from using it in a website name after a generic word or something.
"I actually agree with you"
Oh.
I was just trying to say that, potentially, sperm could contribute to the creation of a human. If it's okay to basically waste the sperm, they why do some people have such objections to abortion? It isn't even aware of its own existence and can hardly be called anything but a potential human.
You mean to tell me that Facebook and Teachbook aren't the same thing!? Amazing! I had no idea.
Facebook should just have to deal with it. They aren't using the name "Facebook," so it's fine. If not, it should be.
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say.
"The embryo is a human"
The sperm cell has a chance to contribute to the creation of a human being. You aren't even giving that potential human being a chance by masturbating. Also, these embryo have almost zero chance of actually growing. They'll just go to waste if they aren't used, so they might as well be used for something useful. I don't see the problem with funding it at all. It's not as if they're forcefully taking them directly from pregnant women.
"It doesn't have the same implications at all"
What implications does 'killing' an embryo that won't ever be allowed to grow anyway have?
"but that's not the same thing as killing anything"
Uh, if something is living, and you take away its life, you killed it. It doesn't matter if it's a plant or a sperm cell.
going to ever be allowed to grow*
Yet, given the right circumstances, they still have a chance to become a human. If this isn't a problem, then neither is using an embryo that isn't going to ever going to be allowed to grow, anyway. They are just cells.
Sperm doesn't exist yet? What? Why? If given the right conditions, it could turn into a real human being. I thought you cared?
The sperm would become a 'human' if it were allowed to be united with an egg. I considered that a potential human, and I consider it murder. You're not even giving the poor things a chance.
But by masturbating, you're essentially decreasing that chance to zero, and not even giving it a chance. It could be considered a potential child being thrown away by using the logic seen in comments above. Not all pregnancies are guaranteed to be successful, either.
Seriously? It was pretty obvious what I was talking about. Or should have been. Masturbation almost has zero chance of conceiving a child. While, obviously, the sperm cell by itself can't become a child, by masturbating, you're basically ensuring it never even has a chance of uniting with an egg, which could be considered wasteful. You're not even giving it a chance.
When someone goes to one business to buy a product instead of going to another business, the first business has stolen potential profit away from the other business because the second business would have had more money if the person went to buy the product there, instead. It relates to the "potential profit" thing. Which pirates are clearly stealing, because they certainly aren't stealing anything else.
I agree, sarcasm and parody are passive-aggressive-teenage bullshit. Who uses either of those?
I know. How many times do I have to state that I do not condone piracy? The fact that some people actually think that it's acceptable to steal something that is in an infinite quantity and deprive the author of future profit brings my blood to a boil. Like competition between businesses where one business is always stealing potential profit from another business.
Though, reading your comment has made me realize something: I'm stealing the potential profit of these businesses simply because I didn't buy their products. If I had bought them, they'd have more money, which means I stole some of their potential, future profit. They invested money into these products expecting to make money in return, and I had the gall not to buy every single one of their products, thereby depriving them of future profit. Much like pirates and competition between businesses.
I'll be back later after I've bought every product in existence.
What are you talking about, friend? You're the one being thick. You support the theft of non-existent (future) profit by supporting competition. You might as well support piracy. Some businesses think they have the right to steal customers (thereby likely stealing future profit away from other businesses) away from other businesses. This is absurd. You should do your part to help stop the theft of future profits.
"And there are no such practices, sorry to burst your bubble."
Sure there is. Do you believe that a child could be conceived if you masturbated without a women nearby? It has no reasonable chance of doing so, and it's basically just risking a potential babies life. A human life, might I add.
"I might as well say that you have to justify allowing parents to kill dependent children, that until they can survive on their own (age of maturity), they aren't real people. Heck, if you leave a baby alone with canned food and a can opener, the baby will starve. Stupid baby."
Except in that case they're capable of comprehending that they exist and aren't leeching off of someones body.
Agreed. Wait, you pirated music? What kind of evil person would do such a thing? Oh, wait, a pirate. Your comment was looking good until you mentioned that, but now I see that you're nothing more than a hypocrite. I bet you don't even have anything against piracy. Let me guess, you also think that when one business steals future profit from another business by luring in a customer that had thought about going to the other business is fine. You support thieves who steal potential profit. For shame.
Oh, of course. I had temporarily forgotten that most people only know enough about technology to use a television remote.