Kevin's Watch

Just wondering who, if anybody, on this board is a real tech-freak. Reason I ask is that I was chatting to a friend of mine last night, and he falls into this category. By this, I mean that this guy, and the people like him, are addicted to technology. They fit their lives around it, it's almost like a god to them.

The conversation freaked me out. Not in a bad way, but in the sense that it was so amazing, and "what the hell next?"

One of the peer to peer hubs that he frequents has a minimum share-level of 150 gigs. To access it, you have to make 150gigs of your drive available to everybody else. Between them, they have access to over 4 terrabytes of data. And it's being passed around like there is no tomorrow.

Can this ever end? With stuff being done on this level, this huge data-sharing, what impact is it going to have on the real world?

I mean, this is freedom of infromation at it's peak. You don't have to pay anything, you just have to be willing to share. They're predicting the end of ISP's, they're already creating wireless peer-to-peer networks, where you don't even have to dial in to get stuff, this is just floating around on the ether.

Can it last? Are governments/businesses going to crack down? And even if they do, will it do any good? I tend to think not. It's too late now. People will find a way around anything, as the continuing piracy thing demonstrates only too well.

I wonder if the creators of ARPANET ever envisaged this.

Curious for your thoughts.

--Avatar

One of the peer to peer hubs that he frequents has a minimum share-level of 150 gigs. To access it, you have to make 150gigs of your drive available to everybody else. Between them, they have access to over 4 terrabytes of data.

Hey, there's a Heaven after all! And all you need to enter is a humongous hard drive. Sweet.

That seems to be pretty much the way they look at it as well.

What I'm really curious about though, are the implications. Are software manufacturers going to realise that charging these high prices cannot last indefinitely?

Or are they first going to take the impractical step of trying to stop such sharing?

The mind really boggles when you think about it. I mean, 4.6 Terrabytes. There aren't even individual physical drives that can hold that yet.

And no end in sight either. At some point, we're going to have to learn to deal with what we have, instead of just making new stuff. There must be some plateau to be reached. Surely?

--Avatar

Aarrgh...too..many...big...questions!

High prices for software may or may not last indefinitely, but companies will still aim for the big profits, regardless. Look at the history of music CD pricing: 20 years ago, when audio CD's were first making their appearance in the marketplace, they were around $20. Well, 20 years later, guess what: CD's are still $20. That's just pure greed. So as a matter of policy, I never buy music CD's at full retail price, only those at special discount. And I always check second-hand CD shops for good deals first.

Meanwhile, software companies continue to charge obscene amounts for their products. I have little sympathy for them when they cry that piracy is affecting their business. Well, if they charged more reasonable prices for their wares, their business might be affected in a more positive way: people might actually buy their software and not feel like they've been robbed blind at the cashier's desk. For instance, 70 or 80 dollars for a game? That's just arrogance. For that amount, I'd rather buy several copies of Runes of the Earth to help feed SRD and his family than surrender it to Doom 3 just to help John Carmack pay for another Lamborghini. Once Doom 3 or whatever hits the bargain bins, then sure, I'll check it out.

That's pretty much exactly the way I feel. I'd love to have an original copy of every music and game CD in my house. I'd always rather buy the original.

But I just can't afford it. Yeah, I always check the bargain bins, but a pirate copy is free. Like you, I don't have much sympathy. Make the prices something that we can afford, and I'll buy it every time. And its even worse out here. We pay a 100% import duty on most things as well, not to mention the tax. So on a newly released music CD, you're looking at the equivalent of almost $40.

It's no wonder that piracy is such a huge part of the electronic "society". And as you say, greed is the key. Surely it's better to take many smaller slices than just a few big ones?

Thing is, as long as the greed continues, so will piracy. Laws, encoding, whatever, are not doing any good. Any attempt at software protection is a temporary measure at best. Couple of days and some gifted cracker is on the job.

And that's part of what I'm saying. These guys believe in freedom of information. Real freedom of information. And there are more and more of them every day.

Decentralisation was great for the net, and it still is. It's far too late to make any effort to stop it that has even a reasonable chance of success.

And I'm glad, to tell the truth. With all its inherent problems, freedom is still better than restriction.

--Avatar

Just because the people selling the software and music are greedy, does that make it right to steal from them?

A hell of a lot more work goes into making a computer game now than went into making one ten years ago. The prices now (which, with inflation are actually lower) reflect the extra work going into games. If fewer people buy games then the companies will have to up the prices or go bankrupt, which will encourage more piracy. If piracy were impossible they would be able to lower their prices, because everyone would have to get their games through legitimate sources, causing more to be sold.

Lowering the prices isn't the way to go. Lower piracy and prices will lower, it won't work the other way round.

The only time I will get a pirate copy of anything is when i can't find it at all in a shop, and even then I'll still buy it if I happen to come across it later after I've got the pirate version already.

Nathan wrote:Just because the people selling the software and music are greedy, does that make it right to steal from them?

No, I suppose that in essence, it doesn't. It perhaps makes it slightly more excusable, considering that we're getting ripped off by them, but that doesn't make it right.

Nathan wrote:If fewer people buy games then the companies will have to up the prices or go bankrupt, which will encourage more piracy. If piracy were impossible they would be able to lower their prices, because everyone would have to get their games through legitimate sources, causing more to be sold.

Lowering the prices isn't the way to go. Lower piracy and prices will lower, it won't work the other way round.

Hmmm, an interesting point, and one which might well be true. Of course, it doesn't take into account that very greed that you mentioned though. If the only way to get a game/prog/whatever was to pay for it, they could equally charge anything that they wanted, and if we wanted it, we'd have to pay or go without.

In the end, you're right really, and I admire your moral conviction. It doesn't chage the fact that there is no way that piracy will ever end. No security measure will stop the hackers, ever. And nothing will stop people from sharing what they have. It's too late. Personally, I would always buy an original if I can afford it. But usually I can't. So I'll have to go without.

--Avatar

In the end, you're right really, and I admire your moral conviction.

I'm afraid I misled you here, I buy the legitimate copy because I don't want to publishers/developers to go out of business, not because I'd feel guilty not buying them.

Of course, piracy is necessary to stop them charging whatever exorbitant price they decide they want. But it should be like unemployment, a necessary small level of piracy to make sure that prices don't get too high. (as there is a necessary small level of unemployment to make sure wages don't get too high.)

Hmm, OK, I understand what you're saying but, of course, you realise that they're not going to go out of business because you pirate their games.

See, while I like your idea of a limited amount of piracy, how do we decide who is "allowed" to pirate, and who not?

I think that if game prices came down substantially, it would automatically reduce piracy, because not as many people would need to pirate.

--Avatar

The Esmer recommends you play the original "Deus Ex", and the 2nd one, Invisible War, (you need some power for #2), for a "perspective" on all things techno-social. I came away with a little more than I went in, and it's not "kid-stuff" by any means. Its very poignant and provoking.

"As bionic government agent J.C. Denton, you're issued a series of risky covert assignments by your employer, the United Nations Anti-Terrorist Coalition (UNATCO)."

(The Esmer is "freak"! , and buys his games, that what job for! )

Hell, I work my ass off but I can't afford to buy the stuff I want/need.

So, yeah - I download movies, TV eps, apps, games, music and books. Not like I'm depriving anyone of the price of them; there's no way I'd ever be able to afford to buy them. Not with the exchange rate the way it is.

And btw - those DC hubs where you have to share all those freakin' GB's - what a waste of time and resources. You can find whatever you want for free if you know where to look, without having to give away your bandwidth.

Heck, I'd LOVE to buy all that stuff legitimately - but c'mon, 120 bucks for a book? Basically, my choices are: download it now, or get it from the library next month.

The Esmer didn't say he "paid" for anything else he uses...heh.

Avatar wrote:
One of the peer to peer hubs that he frequents has a minimum share-level of 150 gigs. To access it, you have to make 150gigs of your drive available to everybody else. Between them, they have access to over 4 terrabytes of data. And it's being passed around like there is no tomorrow.

That's just plain CRAZY.
What a bunch of losers.
I've never heard of such lunacy!

Um.....[checks over personal 300gig inventory]....you wouldn't wanna throw me a link to this shangri-la called a hub, would you?

No link per se, as I understand it, but I'll ask him for the name of it, or how to find it, or whatever, and send you a PM.

Personally, I feel like Edge does. With the exception that I don't download books, because I hate reading off my pc. (Actually, I don't download much at all myself, since I don't have a connection at home, (oh woe is me), but I "organise".

--A

--A

Man, I hate to come off as judgemental, but you guys are talking about luxury items. Games. Computer software. Movies. If it were food, that would be different. But I can't see the justification for stealing ANYTHING other than for survival. What about the people who download illegal copies of Donaldson's books? Maybe they can't afford to pay for it. Doesn't it still outrage you? Donaldson is rich compared to them (he's rich compared to me, too.) So this argument by degrees that you all are making is fallacious.

We're talking about the product of creative minds, putting their time, their education, their imagination, and their love into what they produce. They bring something out of nothing. They are the true producers in this world, calling things into being that never existed before. And you have no problem leeching off of something so pure as creation? You think it justifies your actions by calling them greedy? Just what do you call stealing things you don't need? Isn't that greedy?

Malik, when I was in PC Repair school, my teacher, an old retired NASA guy, had us install Win95 on our PC's, and taught us to copy disks at the same time. How was this accomplished? By "illegally" copying those 13 floppy disks one by one, and keeping them for our own personal use from then on. Right? Wrong? It's just the way it's always been done by mostly everybody. Do you think Bill Gates has paid for every piece of sw he ever used? He actually STOLE the code for DOS! Or any of these "creative" people you speak of, do you think they never had a PC with a "borrowed" copy of Windows on it? I pay for the things I enjoy, games, for exactly the reasons you specify, but all the rest? I say if you don't want your "product" stolen, lock it down so people can't easily use it without some outside help. They get 90 percent of their stuff "sold", so the minute percentage that is pirating on the average is ignorable. Places like China, on the other hand have based their whole economy on pirating, in every form, not just pc related. Thats different, IMO. So no, its not right, but somehow in some ways its not "that wrong", either.

To be sure though, Malik has a valid point. It is just greed. It's wanting (taking) something that I can't afford, or justify paying for. And something that I could live without if I didn't have it.

In its simplest definition, it is theft, plain and simple, and in that definition, there is no justification.

Of course, we rationalise it into a neat little "grey" space, because it's not actually hurting the "victim." (For example, in by far the majority of cases, the creators of the software are not getting paid according to how much it sells. They get a salary, the company gets the profits.)

Regardless though, it is still theft.

The simplest answer of course, is that if every game or bit of software was priced affordably, I'd never pirate anything, and nor, I suspect, would anybody else.

If every game was a hundred bucks, (my currency) I'd buy an original every time...because originals are far better. (Once a game gets a bit older, and the price comes down to that level, I do buy it if I like it, because originals are better.) But I can't afford to pay 3 or 4 hundred bucks for a new game. (And why are they that expensive? To some extent at least, corporate greed, I would guess.)

Morally, I should just deny myself the pleasure, and do without. I'm not that moral though I guess.

All that said, I'm not sure that the question of degree is as fallacious as you suggest. Certainly the matter of degree is considered valid in all legal senses -- Punching somebody is not as bad as breaking their arms and legs, for example.

Stealing a hundred dollars is not as bad as stealing a million, even if the victim of the first can afford it less than the victim of the second (which should be taken into account, don't you think?)

I think we can define all "crime" in terms of severity, and the amount of harm that is does. Of course, it is your right to argue that all crime is equally bad, and I'll be more than willing to debate the point.

--Avatar

Right? Wrong? It's just the way it's always been done by mostly everybody.

So you might as well do something because everyone else does it? Loads of my friends smoke, I might as well do that as well.

What a crappy argument, it boils down to: "succumb to peer pressure. It's wrong but eveyone else does it, so go ahead."

Avatar, I like your comeback about crimes of degree. That makes a lot of sense now that I think about it. Sure, breaking an arm is not the same as killing.

And as a fan of Nietzsche, I do agree that there is no absolute good and evil, right and wrong.

I suppose this is merely a pet peeve of mine, because someday I'd like to make money off my own creative output. And I suspect that many here feel the same way when it comes to Donaldson's books getting pirated. It's merely a personal flare up of indignation.

Ignore my posts. Sorry to have butted in.

Malik23 wrote: Ignore my posts. Sorry to have butted in.

No way, it was good.
I partly agree with you too.
But I still do it.
Why?
My definition of theft I guess.
I have no qualms about trading songs.
Music companies don't sell MP3s.
It's a different product.
If I copied it onto a cassette while listening on the radio the music companies would like to say I'm stealing (actually they might, wasn't that a lawsuit once?)
What REALLY pisses me off about the recording industry suing people and courts siding with them is .....it's FREE!
No one's making money of file sharing.
If there was a company SELLING bootleg movies and songs then I would TOTALLY support the industry in going after them, support huge files and jail time.
THAT is stealing to me.
Everything else is sharing.
Like going to the library or having a book read to you.