"Deprive small indie devs of revenue because advertisers would get a cut" is a bad take. Support small developers or don't use their product. If a small dev chooses to use a platform you don't like then don't use their product.
IMO piracy is only justified when it corrects for a problem. Doing it without consideration for who is being harmed isn't cool.
If taking $1 from Google also means taking $5 from a small dev, you're doing more harm than good
"I'm going to steal stuff because if I don't then people who NEED to steal it won't be able to" is some serious mental gymnastics.
Your argument only works for creating cracks, not consuming them. Absolutely create cracks even when they aren't needed. But that's not the same as using the crack even when you don't need to, just because you can
You misunderstand my meaning: they shouldn't be able to go out and remove all copies of something in existence. But they should be able to limit distribution of the thing they created, up to and including stopping distribution.
I don't have faith in their ethics or logic. But I do have faith in their understanding that backing the 8th Circuit on this would be political suicide. It would catalyze their opponents in a way they are not interested in
This is an issue called "standing". In the American legal system, in order to bring a case to court, you must have proper legal standing to make whatever argument or claim you're trying to make.
For example, I can't sue someone that harms my neighbor. I don't have standing to do so. My neighbor has to be the one to do it.
The ruling in this case essentially says that only the federal government has standing to bring Section 2 complaints
It's a crappy ruling and will almost certainly be overturned because it makes no sense to have the federal government be the one responsible for enforcing local violations of the VRA
This gets into a weird debate about the difference between reproducing a thing and describing a thing. With sufficiently accurate description you can create a reproduction.
And when you take that into the realm of computing, where we've functionally automated the process of describing things with extreme accuracy it gets really blurry. But we can all agree that "take what you want, give nothing back" is not a good way to run a society, least of all an economy :D
So we're left with the task of crafting internally consistent legislation that attempts to allow certain types of reproductions, but not others.
The thing is, this is the type of debate just should be happening at the administrative level, in Congress, etc. But instead, special interest groups and lobbyists are doing the legislating on this stuff.
What's interesting with the comparison to books is that you can stop it from being published. You can't force people to give up the copy they already bought, but they can't make more copies and distribute it.
Hard to draw that distinction in the digital world
And if you want a better comparison, though of YouTube like a drive-in theater. You're not allowed to make a copy of the film with your camcorder and go distribute it.
Totally. Though, that case can be a tiny bit tricky. Like, people should be allowed to remove stuff from the Internet that they've created if they want, but it should also be okay to archive content that may be abandoned or lost. Hard to create rules that differentiate the two effectively for enforcement
I was mostly being snarky, but their security is mediocre and their user experience is meh. But I'm also in software where revision control systems are A Thing™ so I'm probably biased
Yeah, exactly. It's the same reason I have little hesitance pirating a game I already have when the platform I have it on doesn't support mods (looking at you, Xbox game pass)
I don't have an answer for you, unfortunately, but I'm just gonna say that using Dropbox as a company's primary file store is one of the signs of apocalypse or something. I'd consider quitting just for that xD
There are lots of reasons to pirate stuff, but this argument in particular boils down to "We should steal stuff now because maybe some day in the future I won't be able to use the paid version after they go out of business." And that is shitty.
You bought it, so go crack it now that the license check is broken and nobody will care. That's GOOD piracy. Support the creators, pirate when you can't or it's unreasonable to pay (more).
Don't just pirate to mitigate theoretical future inconvenience. Do it to circumvent actual inconvenience, or to get things you couldn't otherwise afford, or to say "fuck you" to big, shitty companies.
But pirating from a small-time dev just in case there are maybe license problems far in the future is not The Way
Because all you name below are AAA games where everyone wants to flex their budget. It's like asking "why do big budget movies focus so often on explosions and action, instead of stories? What happened to things like Shawshank Redemption?"
As soon as you step away from big AAA games that lean heavily on cinematic influence, you get much more gameplay-focused content. I could name a million of them.
But it's a spectrum, not an on/off switch. There's a huge array of different types of games with different combinations of action, cinematics, dialog, quick-time events, racing, flying, rhythm-matching, puzzles, and on and on and on
Tell us what you're actually looking for and we could give suggestions :)
Don't tell us what you don't want. Tell us what interests you
There is only one thing for an adult to say when children try to have sex with them: "stop, right now, we're taking you to therapy" 😐
I was honestly prepared to start reading the books despite the lechery, and I was worried it would be worse in the books than the anime. I can only imagine what's in there at this point
Yeah, I don't particularly care if an adult having sex with a child is important to the plot. It is no different than the "she's actually a 2000 year old kami" trope. Adults of any kind having sex with children of any kind = instant bail from me. I'm sure there's interesting plot to be had, and character growth. Which makes it a shame that "giving the lolicon a chance to fuck a child" was part of it.
Maybe I'm misremembering the timing but seeing a grown man who is an admitted lolicon have sex with a child was disgusting to me. I don't care what body they inhabit. It's just gross
I felt very similarly for the entirety of the first season, right up until the last episode. That was a bridge I could not cross and quit the series right there and then. It was fucked up for multiple different reasons and I simply couldn't get past it.
I mean, this is coming out of the 8th Circuit. Look at the territory they cover. I'm not even remotely surprised