Do you buy games and software or do you buy it illegaly to others and download it from the net?
What kind of person are you?
Well, in Portugal things are to damn expensive, so guess wich is my option :-)
I'm going to stop every bit of piracy I'm doing right now.
Right now... stop it, Telos... stop that download. Dammit.
Ah! Change... your... value.... judgments.. to .. be... more... h-o-l-i-s-t-i-c.
*chokes*
.
.
.
.
*dies*
God it's so hard not to do it. It's right there! All you have to do is click download.
I'd be much happier if I paid for everything I own. That much is for certain. Now, all I need to do is make some money.
Maybe I'd start making money if I didn't feel like I could just download the things I wanted? Maybe!!
I dont make money with things that i find ir buy (illegally) because its dangerous (thats the only reason ;)
I resisted this trend for a LONG time, I tell you. I think I've been doing it now for a little over a year. But honestly, like you say Telos, it's just so tempting. Most of the songs I've download are old though- 80's, early 90's... Don't have a huge collection overall. Only ever downloaded 3 full albums, and 1 recent game. I've got a fair collection of old 2d games though... haven't played much of anything in awhile however. Only downloaded a few mainstream movies... lots of "non-mainstream" stuff though. :D
I have a feeling this topic's going to be moderated.
Having said that, I don't pay. :D
No, this is good. I think this has spiritual significance.
I think I'm beginning to realize how being aware of our self-conflicting value judgments play such a critical role in self-determination...
Admit it! Piracy makes you weak. :o
If me downloading these things for free hurt anyone in any way other than not putting money in someone's wallet, I might feel guilty. But at the same time I realize that if everyone followed this same idea, we wouldn't have any of these things to begin with because no one would venture to create them if there was no monetary reward. Maybe this is just a fundamental flaw in the spirituality of our society.
I would love to live in a free society, where everyone had a responsibility but did it for absolutely free, provided that everyone else in that society did the same. Of course that would have to come with not being greedy, etc., which ruins it all :( Not that it wasn't extremely unlikely to begin with.
There is the question though as to weather you think it's wrong or not. And if you do think it's wrong, why do you feel that way? Is it because that's how you're supposed to feel? Or is it because certain people aren't getting paid as much as you think they should? or is it something else?
Quote
I think I'm beginning to realize how being aware of our self-conflicting value judgments play such a critical role in self-determination...
Please elaborate...
Well, it's not piracy if the creator of the song says it's okay that you have it.
But if they don't, then, under the law, you haven't just "not put money in someone's wallet," you've actually stolen something that was theirs - which is not necessarily the song itself, but the right to listen to it freely and take it wherever you want.
I'm at heart a Star Trek fan and I fantasize about living in such a society - no money, just the obligation to improve one's self and to protect that philosophy. Unfortunately, Star Trek is very silent on talking about how this actually is supposed to work. It's just fine under the military guise of Starfleet (you follow orders and that's that), but not if you want to be a writer and have a big house or live in a holosuite.
Ironically, the show Star Trek was created out of a monetary standards based economic system. And, under the law, I steal Paramount property when I download episodes... ruining the dream of a society where no one violates the social contract. Funny, isn't it?
QuotePlease elaborate...
I'm not sure how, yet. I'd like to wait for Frank's opinion in another thread.
But, simply, I think your personal system of ethics (value judgments) drives how you think and therefore drives everything you see and everything you do.
QuoteBut if they don't, then, under the law, you haven't just "not put money in someone's wallet," you've actually stolen something that was theirs - which is not necessarily the song itself, but the right to listen to it freely and take it wherever you want.
I'm
strongly opposed to that. I think it goes against the whole purpose of art; defaces music. Programs may be a little different, though, lol. I dunno. Still just seems like copying bits of data to me. Not like stealing a banana from someone on the street, you know?
I don't have a moral problem with it. I do still buy some software and games that I really like. I'm going to try and switch to open source software, that way it's legal and free. Piracy might start to seriously hurt software sales but if it does hopefully everything will start to go more open source.
Yes I am all for the open source movement.
Firefox - Nice web browser
Thunderbird - excellent mail reader
Open Office - Free program like Microsoft office
They even have an operating system called Linux, if you don't want to use Windows.
Quote from: no_leaf_cloverQuoteBut if they don't, then, under the law, you haven't just "not put money in someone's wallet," you've actually stolen something that was theirs - which is not necessarily the song itself, but the right to listen to it freely and take it wherever you want.
I'm strongly opposed to that. I think it goes against the whole purpose of art; defaces music. Programs may be a little different, though, lol. I dunno. Still just seems like copying bits of data to me. Not like stealing a banana from someone on the street, you know?
You're strongly opposed to the idea that copying music from an artist
without their permission is stealing?
If you were an artist and it was your livelihood, you might think differently! (but that's obvious).
Consider this. Our modern philosophical bent towards seeing art as something detached from economy is, I think, due to
Arthur Schopenhauer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schopenhauer). And we should be aware of this, because
his philosophy of aesthetics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schopenhauer%27s_aesthetics) is very intricate and ultimately rooted in the idea that reality sucks. According to him, the will interacts with reality and the will is evil. The artist, therefore, is a hero in finding temporary relief from reality. Essentially, art is for the sake of art and not for the sake of reality (because reality sucks).
What does this say to us? Obviously reality's going to suck if you treat it as something that sucks. And, you may not feel the need to absorb so much art if you take the role of a more substantially creative person yourself and affect the landscape of reality.
QuoteYou're strongly opposed to the idea that copying music from an artist without their permission is stealing?
Pretty much. Putting your name on it and redistributing it, I think, would be more like stealing it. Downloading it for free and listening to it while they're charging cash for albums, I don't think is the same. I think that's completely selfish.
QuoteIf you were an artist and it was your livelihood, you might think differently! (but that's obvious).
I would likely experience this first-hand, but ASCAP doesn't publish for free. I'd still need another source of income though, or at least some kind of secure way of life. No big deal really. I don't see why artists NEED so much freaking money. Especially pop 'artists' like Britney Spears
QuoteAccording to him, the will interacts with reality and the will is evil. The artist, therefore, is a hero in finding temporary relief from reality. Essentially, art is for the sake of art and not for the sake of reality (because reality sucks).
I'm not completely understanding this perspective. I don't see how art and reality can be differentiated.
I think Beethoven was dead on when he said music was a higher revelation than all of philosophy, and thereby relates directly to reality, if even in a personal, subjective way. Beethoven's late works especially seem spiritual by nature, and this was no coincidence. Listening may provide 'relief from reality' for a bit (if I'm understanding your use of the phrase correctly?), but you also gain something from it that would make it no less of an escape from reality than dreaming or even astral projecting. People don't charge for those things (but only because they can't :wink: ), and no real artist would be so overly concerned about ensuring their monetary profit, though an absence of another source of income may force them into a situation where making
a profit is necessary.
Chopin was said to have always gazed out his window ashamed as his students placed their payments on his mantle (for piano lessons, that is, not simply listening to him play!). Unfortunately he had no other real source of income at such times, and resorted to this to ensure he had food to eat. That's a stark contrast to those who raise such a fuss when their music is downloaded and listened to by various people across the internet. Those guys are in the wrong 'business' as far as I'm concerned, and what they create to share with humanity belongs to humanity.
QuoteWhat does this say to us? Obviously reality's going to suck if you treat it as something that sucks. And, you may not feel the need to absorb so much art if you take the role of a more substantially creative person yourself and affect the landscape of reality.
Still don't quite understand this line of thought lol. And honestly I'm too tired/lazy to read those links at the moment, but I may later as I appreciate you posting them and wouldn't want to be too much of an butt. On the contrary, though, 'reality' as in the 3D I think is in itself like a massive masterpiece and nothing I have urge to escape from, though humanity has some enriching creations of its own that are nonetheless worth checking out.
Yeah, I made those statements in the context of those links. Sorry, my ability to write a summary of key concepts from text is really bad (something I should work on if I'm going to continue being a member of a forum [Edit: Or graduate with a degree in Economics, for that matter]). It's pretty much recognized in academic circles that our current fascination of the "starving artist" comes from Schopenhauer, so those readings should interest you.
Anyways, if you feel so strongly about your views, will you try to enact changes in laws to compensate? For that matter, will you run for office? I'm just trying to gauge how "strongly" you really feel about this.
And by the way, I think that Beethoven would have had a fit if he knew that people could just record his music onto a disc and never have to listen to him again if they wanted to hear "his" music.
I dont care if its not morally good to steal musics from artists. If i dont do it, other 5 millions of people will do it for shure.
I dont care to much because its the artist that much be worried, not me. Besides that, i live in a country where a music CD or a computer game are to much expensive. So just think: if would never buy such games/musics there is no difference if i get such things on net. btw, if there is a good music cd that i like, i will buy it.
Recently i have bought the new "Galvanize" album, from Chemical brothers and i could easly download it from the net. I buy evey cd from Megadeth, my favorite heavy metal band.
As you can se, piracy its not that bad.
8)
Quote
They even have an operating system called Linux, if you don't want to use Windows.
I am using Linux now and for me it's much better than Windows.
Kazbadan, that's exactly the spiritual aspect I wanted to point out. You've already made up your mind on what the future is, and you've decided that the future is a world where you don't have much money and things are too expensive.
In economics, what I'm referring to is called the "law of elastic demand," and it states that people's purchases are responsive to changes in prices and changes in their own income.
Of course, some people will never buy a certain product, like if they just think it's bad art. But what about the albums that are kind of good but not great, which are overpriced?
What if a year from now the price of an overpriced album comes down? Or what if a year into the future you had more disposable income? Does it make a difference in your process of self-determination if you just wait for that to happen... and don't download it from the internet?
What if the artists were required to give up their FREE promotion and advertising on radio? For instance, the radio stations MUST pay for the copyrighted material before it's played on air. Or, get a percentage of the income from the sale of songs they promote.
Would this dilemma go away?
Wisp, I'm not sure you what you mean. Do artists get free advertisements which say "by this album, attend this concert, etc." Or by "promotion" do you just mean the songs themselves?
well since portuguese wages are so friking low...i can't blame us Lol
Well done said! In Portugal you have good excuses for piracy ;-)!
ya everything is friking expensive even goods of first necessity
The two of have pointed out the larger issue... the huge differences in economy and economic policy between nations.
I thought I was going to understand some of it in my international economics classes... but about the only thing I understand is that there are so many differences in the way we run each other's countries, both politically and economically.
But there is international law. Trade agreements about intellectual property create that law, and according to the law you're still stealing lol.
I'm not trying to accuse you... I'm guilty of it more than anybody. But maybe we are going about it the wrong way?
I live in Serbia and Montenegro.
Here you could walk in a store in the CENTER of a town and buy illegal stuff, anything you wanted, just a few years back (some 4,5 maybe 6).
Not only that, but you could not find any originals if you wanted to (not that I did).
When someone had an original game everyone was so surprised and ..... "Wow you actually have an original... WOOOW" was a very common sentence.
Then they banned the selling of those in stores, but you could still find illegal stuff on flea markets and some unregistered stores, and no one would bother them. Legal software was more and more easy to find.
Well very recently (like from a few days ago), there is no illegal stuff on flea markets, so you can just buy from pirates that work from their houses.
Let me just point out that original software is now still harder to find than pirated (not counting the internet, which is very slow in my country), and 3 new games would be more than a months pay.
So as I have been brought up like that, I absolutely have no moral objections to piracy.
Although I have to admit I am starting to feel a little guilty abouth not buying some stuff I use constantly, and really is excellent.
Also I do try to use open source stuff as much as I can.
QuoteAnyways, if you feel so strongly about your views, will you try to enact changes in laws to compensate? For that matter, will you run for office? I'm just trying to gauge how "strongly" you really feel about this.
Well that would be a bad way to approach that question then, because I don't think I could ever go into politics for anything. The whole system is too far gone.
QuoteAnd by the way, I think that Beethoven would have had a fit if he knew that people could just record his music onto a disc and never have to listen to him again if they wanted to hear "his" music.
I don't know; he was a horrible conductor, and that was before he went deaf :wink:
Smilodon... thank you very much for that post.
That adds a lot of perspective.
QuoteThe whole system is too far gone.
See, that's what I'm talking about. Where's your spirituality? Don't you have faith in change?
QuoteWhere's your spirituality? Don't you have faith in change?
Faith in the system to change? :?:
I mean, don't you have faith that you can make a change in society? Or to put it in new age terms, a change in your reality?
If a new or unknown artist comes on the scene. The person wants to become known among the population. They give their music free to the media (radio,tv) in order to receive recognition and acceptance. This is free advertising and promotion. If the song sells (becomes popular and in demand), it now begins to have value.
Instead of an artist taking freely of this opportunity, make it a cost to them. Unless...
Their in the true spirit of sharing. They receive free promotion and advertisement to get started, and continued free advertising. A radio station provides free advertising each time the song is played.
If, on the other hand, this person's successes (it wouldn't be an issue if not) lead them to not want to share the wealth, then make them pay for their own advertising of any addirional songs. They should pay before their material is even placed on the airways, unless the media pays for them,.... not likely. That's why new songs are played experimentally in the first place.
To put it simply, if an artist wants ALL of it's listeners to pay, then they shouldn't receive benefits. If this happened, I believe they would change their tune.
For instance. Telos wants to give a performance on a television program. He makes up a contract. Would it happen?
Let's say someone gives Telos a chance but without the contract. Would Telos?
Telos makes it big. Does Telos turn on those who brought him this opportunity?
Do the people responsible for creating Telo the star,know they can change things?
There should be a way of telling who are the artists willing to share their gift. Those are the only ones I would buy from. I wouldn't want to listen to anyone who isn't (let alone, buy).
What could those selfish ones have to offer? There is no honor among the entire bunch of them. I wouldn't contaminate my mind with their garbage.
Quote from: TelosI mean, don't you have faith that you can make a change in society? Or to put it in new age terms, a change in your reality?
is that question only for no_leaf_clover or for all of us?
if it's only for him,i apologize
well, i cant make a change in society because I'm too far insignificant to influence it in any way :)
QuoteThey give their music free to the media (radio,tv) in order to receive recognition and acceptance.
Do you know of an actual instance of this happening?
Wisp, I'm trying to follow but I'm finding it very difficult. I apologize, I just have too much business school garbage in my head now.
Radio stations focus group songs to gauge their popularity before broadcasting them. Along with other devices of marketing research, they learn how good a song is and how often they should play it. This information is valuable and costs money, and is likely done in concert with distribution companies en masse in order to save on costs and to streamline the process. There is no free publicity on radio as far as I can see.
If someone is in the true spirit of sharing, then they don't own anything. Not even their own ideas.
You always CAN and DO make a change in society.
The more influence you have on more people, the more you change your surroundings, thus you change them, weather you are aware of it or not.
No matter how insignificant changes you are making in the big picture, you are defiantly making some.
And no one knows how much they can change society, directly or indirectly.
Indirectly in the meaning, lets say that you influence a guy to write something, you encourage him, and that changes millions of peoples lives...
The idea of changing (or not changing) society is more in depth than it seams.
nah
scientists are the ones who make impacts
and those people have very high IQ's
i'd suprise myself if i even fit in the "normal " iq society
I can have impact in society: i can make all women around me becoming crazy ;)
(ok, ok...i am kiding: not all the womens: just the ones i want to get crazy: sexy hots babys and things like that...about old womens, that ones i cannot make them going crazy because i dont like them).
AS yo can see its easy to have impact in the world around you :D
Lol you did demonstrate my point, although you were not serious :P
QuoteI mean, don't you have faith that you can make a change in society? Or to put it in new age terms, a change in your reality?
Well, I plan on having a place to live out in the country by a stream where I can produce/gather my own food, run simple electrical devices off of manual generators, etc., so that I can be completely independent of the system and not have to worry about it. Is that what you mean by changing my reality? :?
As far as changing the system itself, I'd rather spend my time elsewhere. People are being constantly manipulated by the media and trying to get changes by speaking out I think would only give me gray hair. I may 'speak out' in my own way, though I don't know how much good that would really do either.
QuotePeople are being constantly manipulated by the media
Skeptics say the same thing about new agers... that we're manipulated by the media that sells us junk science.
In reality, the media is following market principles and gives the people what they want in the style they want. If it looks like crap, it's because people want crap.
It will change when people stop wanting crap.
Telos,
Oh my, thanks for bringing me back into this century. I had forgotten about the programmed machinery. I guess opting out of the system has left me out of touch (thank goodness).
So, 99 cents a song makes sense now. I'm glad I bought up alot of cassetts when they were going out.
Maybe you can start a real estate thread. :)
QuoteSkeptics say the same thing about new agers... that we're manipulated by the media that sells us junk science.
In reality, the media is following market principles and gives the people what they want in the style they want. If it looks like [edit], it's because people want [edit].
It will change when people stop wanting [edit].
Yeah, I don't doubt that at all. I was referring more to the media on politics, though. What happens a lot is we're presented with two choices or views, etc. and expected to choose between them without thinking outside of the box - and of course we do with no problem because we feel that our voice is making a difference in a way we feel is productive. We're also constantly barraged with things that have absolutely no bearing on us, like the Jackson case. Similarly gay rights and the mission to Mars, etc. are periodically brought up to distract attention. The government wouldn't get away with nearly so much if the media was actually on our side rather than theirs (the government's).
I saw a bit of Fox News the other day and was shocked at the psychology they use to push their agendas. Even the commercials! I don't think they can even joke about being fair and balanced anymore - it's become ring-wing enough to make up for every liberal news network on the planet and then some.
On some random side note I went to Wal-Mart this evening (yes, I know :( ) and saw a deck of cards with the presidents on them, and on the box was a picture of George Washington side by side with George W. Bush. It was disgusting. I suppose it would be like being in Nazi Germany in the late 1930s and seeing a picture of Hitler right next to (insert name of great German leader here). :?