greenskye @ greenskye @lemmy.zip

Posts

0

Comments

7

Joined

1 mo. ago

Cloud everything, saas, and offshore workers are all still things that have been negatively affecting people for years and never really went away even if the hype died down.

Piracy is somewhat similar to vigilantism to me. My ability to consider it a negative is directly related to how fair I consider the legitimate methods available to be.

If similar efforts were focused on consumer protection laws as we do IP protection, I don't think pirates would have much leg to stand on, and they'd be seen in more of a negative light.

But since consumers are regularly fucked by corporations, all I see is two sides both doing bad shit and I'm not feeling all that charitable for the faceless megacorp. I also dislike pirates who pirate from small time creators. But that's about as far as I can care given the state of things.

We should be focusing on stronger consumer rights to truly fix the problem for all sides.

I mean it's kind of classic issues with unions. It doesn't work if only place is doing it, but the more that do, the less market they have access to. Europe is a pretty decent sized market, so it may still hurt. And if they do leave, well China certainly has a lot of their own homegrown solutions, so that's not an entirely unreasonable option.

Organized crime would have dedicated bureaucracy offices dedicated to illegally filing titles, deeds, tax returns, etc. Basically launder all their money in a single night.

What if some of the locals want it taken away for protection, but the government wants it destroyed?

There's no clear 'owner' in many cases. I think it places where it's uncertain, then we should prioritize saving the artifacts over the ones that seek to destroy them.

Who do you recognize as the authority to make that decision though? If the locals are currently ruled by a terrorist group or Nazis or whatever, do they get to decide? What about the locals that disagree with the government currently in power?

And an answer of 'if we just didn't needlessly meddle' might be the ideal, but it's ignoring the realities that we have meddled and some countries are unlikely to stop doing so. We have to accept the world we have not the one we wished we had.

What's the opinion on certain high risk countries where there's a high likelihood of the artifacts simply being destroyed? If I remember correctly ISIS and other similar organizations have burned or bombed several historical sites before.