Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6438

Uzique wrote:

Mentioned multiple times by multiple people in this thread already... generally regarded as the best private-torrent sites for music, rising out of the OiNK's old community.
I miss OiNK
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6732

good.
VicktorVauhn
Member
+319|6362|Southern California

Ioan92 wrote:

blademaster wrote:

IFPI chairman Ludvig Werner takes a more cynical view of the site's practices and claimed that greed is the principle motivation behind The Pirate Bay's services. "The profiteers behind The Pirate Bay have no interest in free speech, and they are not running The Pirate Bay because they love music and films," said Werner in a statement. "They are totally mercenary and are driven by the desire for personal wealth.
Where the fuck is the logic in this fucking statement. Its the fucking opposite goddammit. Greed is the motivation to sell and make profit, not to fucking give out shit for free. No interest in free speech?! WTF! Its the opposite again here. People who sell shit have no interest other that profit. They don't give a shit about free speech. Loving music and films? No shit captain obvious, they did it because they were probably tired of the the extreme useless shit on the internet like a fucking font at 30 euro or fucking photoshop at 999$. Mercenary? wtf!!! again that's the people who sell shit!!!!

Ludvig Werner; whoever the fuck you are, here is the Darwin award. Now may you please go die in a fucking fire for the benefit of mankind?!


sigh
I don't really agree with the comment, but its logical.

The people who are selling the copyrighted material are funding production of a product to make a profit off it.

The guys from pirate bay attract traffic with material they did not produce and then sell advertising to that traffic.
Is a legitimate distinction, and I don't find it hard to believe that the owners of the pirate bay run that site to turn a profit off advertising revenue...
max
Vela Incident
+1,652|6538|NYC / Hamburg

Parker wrote:

12/f/taiwan wrote:

max wrote:

I wonder how long before the moral fags take over this thread
Parker.
aawww, isnt that cute?

so because i wont join in on stealing things, and because i tell you people what you are, im now a "moral fag"?


me. a moral fag.
i never thought i would see the day.


oh wait, im probably a "moral fag" for NOT finding the humor in child molestation either....amirite max?

you guys are cool.

srsly.
There's nothing to debate here. You just ignore our legal system and instead focus on your system of morals which are just your very own personal opinion. When I bring forward the argument that morals are personal and that the morals of other people have no power in forcing you into a certain behavior, you go on and attack my credibility with a completely unrelated topic instead of sticking to the topic at hand.

I guess moralfag is the wrong word for you. On some issues you take the moral approach while at the same time admitting to having done some rather shady stuff yourself. It makes you a hypocrite instead.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot  xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6364|The Gem Saloon

max wrote:

There's nothing to debate here.
sure there is.

or else you would not have made the statement to begin with.

or did you just want to take a jab at me?

max wrote:

You just ignore our legal system and instead focus on your system of morals which are just your very own personal opinion.
isnt this thread about people getting in legal trouble over what you claim is legal?

i guess someones confused.

being a lawyer, you should go set them straight

max wrote:

When I bring forward the argument that morals are personal and that the morals of other people have no power in forcing you into a certain behavior, you go on and attack my credibility with a completely unrelated topic instead of sticking to the topic at hand.
completely unrelated?

we are talking about morals.
i can see your deleted posts, and i can see what you have been temp banned for.
im sorry, but as far as morals go, you are pretty disgusting.

max wrote:

I guess moralfag is the wrong word for you.
hey!
you found a spine....kinda.
gj

max wrote:

On some issues you take the moral approach while at the same time admitting to having done some rather shady stuff yourself. It makes you a hypocrite instead.
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT
Its not really that difficult of a concept, the morality aspect. Someone makes a product, and they don't want you to get it unless you pay them for it. Its their property after all, and they can control it how they want. You downloading a torrented version is stealing from them. I don't know of a single society which has ever deemed stealing legal or morally correct, primarily because it isn't. Whether people choose to adhere to these morals or not is their personal choice, but that doesn't change the fact that pirating is morally wrong and makes you a petty thief. Kind of pathetic, in all honesty.

If you want an analogy you possibly may understand, think of if you worked for someone and gave them something, contingent on your remuneration. After you are done, though, they decide they don't want to pay you. You naturally aren't going to be very happy, because you've lost something (time) without receiving anything you expected to. Its the same way with moviemakers, musicians, and game companies who expect their compensation for the time they've put in producing a product. Consider it.

I know I'll get called a moralfag or whatever. Although I hate stating this, it really just shows an incredibly lack of maturity. I hope, one day, you get some, because currently, it gives me little hope for a better society in the future.

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-02-22 23:17:20)

VicktorVauhn
Member
+319|6362|Southern California

max wrote:

There's nothing to debate here. You just ignore our legal system and instead focus on your system of morals which are just your very own personal opinion. When I bring forward the argument that morals are personal and that the morals of other people have no power in forcing you into a certain behavior, you go on and attack my credibility with a completely unrelated topic instead of sticking to the topic at hand.

I guess moralfag is the wrong word for you. On some issues you take the moral approach while at the same time admitting to having done some rather shady stuff yourself. It makes you a hypocrite instead.
Ehhh, morality is pretty damn close to a universal.

Let me as you this... If I honestly believe that kidnapping your loved ones, slicing their faces until they are unrecognizable, then searing there skin with a cattle branding iron while they bleed to death is the right thing to do would you believe I acted morally?
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441

VicktorVauhn wrote:

max wrote:

There's nothing to debate here. You just ignore our legal system and instead focus on your system of morals which are just your very own personal opinion. When I bring forward the argument that morals are personal and that the morals of other people have no power in forcing you into a certain behavior, you go on and attack my credibility with a completely unrelated topic instead of sticking to the topic at hand.

I guess moralfag is the wrong word for you. On some issues you take the moral approach while at the same time admitting to having done some rather shady stuff yourself. It makes you a hypocrite instead.
Ehhh, morality is pretty damn close to a universal.

Let me as you this... If I honestly believe that kidnapping your loved ones, slicing their faces until they are unrecognizable, then searing there skin with a cattle branding iron while they bleed to death is the right thing to do would you believe I acted morally?
Wait, the fuck, how are you even placing this on the same moral-level as 'stealing' a bunch of 0's and 1's from a digital website?

Some people love their ad absurdum arguments around here.

Also, huge lol @ Parker's lawyer comment to Max. Burnnn!
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT

Uzique wrote:

VicktorVauhn wrote:

max wrote:

There's nothing to debate here. You just ignore our legal system and instead focus on your system of morals which are just your very own personal opinion. When I bring forward the argument that morals are personal and that the morals of other people have no power in forcing you into a certain behavior, you go on and attack my credibility with a completely unrelated topic instead of sticking to the topic at hand.

I guess moralfag is the wrong word for you. On some issues you take the moral approach while at the same time admitting to having done some rather shady stuff yourself. It makes you a hypocrite instead.
Ehhh, morality is pretty damn close to a universal.

Let me as you this... If I honestly believe that kidnapping your loved ones, slicing their faces until they are unrecognizable, then searing there skin with a cattle branding iron while they bleed to death is the right thing to do would you believe I acted morally?
Wait, the fuck, how are you even placing this on the same moral-level as 'stealing' a bunch of 0's and 1's from a digital website?

Some people love their ad absurdum arguments around here.

Also, huge lol @ Parker's lawyer comment to Max. Burnnn!
He was using it to illustrate how morality is much less relative than some people believe. Additionally, you are misrepresenting what piracy really is - its more than taking binary code from a website. Someone as intelligent as you, or at least who prides themself on appearing so, should recognize that.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441
Hey, fuck off with the personal comments relating to intelligence; the most intelligent person in the world could subjectively have their own reasons for pirating certain material. And, if piracy were more than taking digital-property (aka binary code), then it would be clearly classed as actual theft in legal systems. But it's not. You're not stealing an actual physical item. As I said earlier in this thread, that creates an entirely different psychology and rationale within the mind of the 'pirate', as such.

And I know what he was trying to do with his 'illustrative' point. See the "ad absurdum". That example is so extreme that it has little to no real relevance or bearing on the actual point he is trying to make. It takes a very small conflict of my conscience to decide whether or not to click a 'Download' button on a screen, not really comparable with mutilating my fucking family, is it?

Last edited by Uzique (2009-02-23 01:04:49)

libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT
Pointing out logical fallacies is always fun, and since you seem so inclined to do it, I'll point out yours along with addressing your points.

Uzique wrote:

Hey, fuck off with the personal comments relating to intelligence, the most intelligent person in the world could subjectively have their own reasons for pirating 'x' material.
Considering my intelligence comment was related to the nature of stealing intellectual property, not the morality thereof, this comment doesn't address anything.

And, if piracy were more than taking digital-property (aka binary code), then it would be clearly classed as actual theft in legal systems.
Slavery was once legalized as well; you are assuming incorrectly that legal systems are infallible.

You're not stealing an actual physical item. As I said earlier in this thread, that creates an entirely different psychology and rationale within the mind of the 'pirate', as such.
You are indirectly stealing money, which is a physical good. If you hide behind the weak argument you would never have bought it anyways, you are still stealing someone's time, which is partially physical. Either way, you are stealing more than binary code. A pirate may consider it differently, but that is just justification for their actions, not something which means it is different than illegal acquisition of physical property.

And I know what he was trying to do with his 'illustrative' point. See the "ad absurdum". That example is so extreme that it has little to no real relevance or bearing on the actual point he is trying to make. It takes a very small conflict of my conscience to decide whether or not to click a 'Download' button on a screen, not really comparable with mutilating my fucking family, is it?
You are still missing the point. He was trying to illustrate the larger concept of how morality is universal, not necessarily comment directly on the matter of stealing intellectual property. This is potentially an issue of differing interpretations of his argument, but to me, his intentions were clear.

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-02-23 01:17:10)

Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441
Common morality is universal yes, 'morals' regarding piracy are obviously not. It's not so much of a black/white concept, mostly because it's completely fucking trivial in comparison with cattle-branding human beings, no?  I see his intentions, but he loses his point by drawing on such a crazy example. Common human morality concerning murder, slavery, racism etc. I agree with - that exists. There is no common moral ground however on piracy, and no amount of Forum bickering is going to settle that one. Even when piracy cases are eventually brought to court, there are still sooo many grey areas and inconsistencies, mostly because the judiciary and the lay-people are so divided on the matter.

I'm not assuming any legal system is 'infallible', I'm merely stating the need to classify piracy as different from theft. Money is not a 'physical good', and causing a pecuniary loss to someone is not the same as stealing a good or service (i.e. more closely resembling the public conception and legal definition of theft). And again, drawing on the example of slavery is showcasing the same poor debating technique as already demonstrated in the "I'm going to equate taking a 4Mb MP3 file with raping your sister with a butter knife". It's fucking extreme. Piracy is not. Whether you agree with or not, stop arguing about it in these stupid goddamn Forum threads. You're not going to change anyone's opinion, you're just going to look like a prick wading around with your supposed moral-superiority (as laughable as that is if you derive and equate it with murder, slavery and all the other uglies of humanity).

Last edited by Uzique (2009-02-23 01:26:43)

libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT

Uzique wrote:

Common morality is universal yes, 'morals' regarding piracy are obviously not. It's not so much of a black/white concept, mostly because it's completely fucking trivial in comparison with cattle-branding human beings, no?  I see his intentions, but he loses his point by drawing on such a crazy example. Common human morality concerning murder, slavery, racism etc. I agree with - that exists. There is no common moral ground however on piracy, and no amount of Forum bickering is going to settle that one. Even when piracy cases are eventually brought to court, there are still sooo many grey areas and inconsistencies, mostly because the judiciary and the lay-people are so divided on the matter.
I'll just leave this as you interpreting this in a more skeptical manner than me, since there isn't much I can respond to here. I'm not conceding, only recognizing my classification of this as an issue of potential differing interpretation is correct.

As for the other part:

I'm not assuming any legal system is 'infallible', I'm merely stating the need to classify piracy as different from theft.
The only implication of the statement "And, if piracy were more than taking digital-property (aka binary code), then it would be clearly classed as actual theft in legal systems" is that the legal system containing the rules determines the truth in an infallible manner. By claiming something is fact by virtue of the legal system holding it to be so, you are assuming the legal system is infallible.

Money is not a 'physical good', and causing a pecuniary loss to someone is not the same as stealing a good or service (i.e. more closely resembling the public conception and legal definition of theft).
Do explain how, considering every economist considers money to be a means of holding material value; that is, a medium of exchange thereof. Money directly translates into a good or service, so causing the loss of money is equivalent to causing the loss of a physical good. When people lose their wallet with hundreds of dollars in it, are they less angered than if they lost their iPod, merely because the former was a loss of money and the latter a loss of a physical good? Obviously, not. If anything, one could argue money is a worse loss because it is more flexible. Regardless, assuming that monetary loss is less than material loss contradicts the fundamental teachings of economics, and is incorrect.

And again, drawing on the example of slavery is showcasing the same poor debating technique as already demonstrated in the "I'm going to equate taking a 4Mb MP3 file with raping your sister with a butter knife". It's fucking extreme. Piracy is not.
Au contraire. It is serving to illustrate how something could be seen as correct in its day, and preserved as such in fallible laws, even if improved society's views hold it to be morally incorrect. As piracy is still in its infancy, there is no indication that slavery's current status will not be piracy's in 20 or 30 years. You are arguing from the present standpoint, and cannot pass judgement as to whether or not slavery is more of an extreme example than piracy. History will dicatate that, not your own personal views on the matter. The Framers of the US Constitution held slavery as acceptable - the Three - Fifths rule held it implicitly so - and most Maryland residents in 1850 agreed with slavery. Modern society disagrees with them, much as a society in the future may disagree with you.

Whether you agree with or not, stop arguing about it in these stupid goddamn Forum threads. You're not going to change anyone's opinion, you're just going to look like a prick wading around with your supposed moral-superiority (as laughable as that is if you derive and equate it with murder, slavery and all the other uglies of humanity).
Considering you look like a prick with your insufferable arrogance and rampant disregard for the intellectual property of others, its a safe bet to say that character judgement is subjective. Considering you won't halt your behavior, nor that I care about what you think, there is little incentive in this camp to do that either.

Also, for the record, I'm not even championing moral superiority (aside from my first post); I'm just pointing out how wrong you are in regards to piracy. If you keep interpreting that as me imposing moral superiority, that is your prerogative.

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-02-23 01:47:03)

VicktorVauhn
Member
+319|6362|Southern California

Uzique wrote:

Hey, fuck off with the personal comments relating to intelligence; the most intelligent person in the world could subjectively have their own reasons for pirating certain material. And, if piracy were more than taking digital-property (aka binary code), then it would be clearly classed as actual theft in legal systems. But it's not. You're not stealing an actual physical item. As I said earlier in this thread, that creates an entirely different psychology and rationale within the mind of the 'pirate', as such.

And I know what he was trying to do with his 'illustrative' point. See the "ad absurdum". That example is so extreme that it has little to no real relevance or bearing on the actual point he is trying to make. It takes a very small conflict of my conscience to decide whether or not to click a 'Download' button on a screen, not really comparable with mutilating my fucking family, is it?
No, its not comparable at all.
Nor did I mean it to be. I don't give a shit if you pirate everything the internet has to offer. Especially with items companies are already making a ton of money off of (say big Hollywood movies) I don't think its THAT bad... But its still not morally the right thing to do.

It was a response to Max's statement that what is morally right is an opinion.
I am not talking about the morality of the individual engaged in one act versus the other, obviously a big difference there. But that doesn't change the fact that one person believing something is OK does not makes it a moral right.

Crazy example yes, but a lot can be gained by thinking in extremes. There was no comparison between murder and piracy, just a demonstration that one persons beliefs do not dictate what is morally right.

By the way, are you seriously arguing on a forum that people shouldn't argue on a forum?
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6294|New Haven, CT
So it seemingly appears that I was correct.

Last edited by nukchebi0 (2009-02-23 02:08:15)

Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441
You're not correct or wrong, fuck I don't have all day to come on here and quote-breakdown your ass to intellectually fellate myself...

I honestly cannot believe you're typing me dissertations on economic definitions of money and the social implications of modern-day morality. I just come to this thread to recommend people to the good torrent sites, as that was very much the topic of discussion before the holier-than-thou kids came along. It's a pointless argument that will never be settled, I said it in my first post and I said it again. You can challenge me to an intellectual dick-swinging contest all day long, I'm not going to seriously bite and properly engage with you or anyone on this topic. I pirate. Fuck you. The end.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Zimmer
Un Moderador
+1,688|6726|Scotland

Fuck morals. Love pirating.
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5669

Zimmer wrote:

Fuck morals. Love pirating.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441

Zimmer wrote:

Fuck morals. Love pirating.
Exactly, where is the complex debate here.

Woop.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6364|The Gem Saloon

Uzique wrote:

Exactly, where is the complex debate here.
there is no debate.


me>people that steal.


Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6441
... Great for you, really.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6364|The Gem Saloon

Uzique wrote:

... Great for you, really.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
like i said, motherfuckers brought me into this thread.


i could give half a fuck less if shitbags want to take what isnt theirs to take.

but this thread didnt even go past the first page before the bandwagon kiddies wanted to talk shit.


so now the moralfag is telling you all why he is better than you.
phishman420
Banned
+821|5651
so what are the good torrent sites
gnot<3
Leave blank to use forum default.
+45|5525

phishman420 wrote:

so what are the good torrent sites
I sometimes use http://www.btmon.com/ lot of fakes but its easy to spot them out.
Jenspm
penis
+1,716|6702|St. Andrews / Oslo

Parker wrote:

Uzique wrote:

... Great for you, really.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
like i said, motherfuckers brought me into this thread.


i could give half a fuck less if shitbags want to take what isnt theirs to take.

but this thread didnt even go past the first page before the bandwagon kiddies wanted to talk shit.


so now the moralfag is telling you all why he is better than you.
right..............



Anyways, as Uzique has said about 5000 times, Piracy-moral debates are completely useless because nobody, except the so-called moralfags, cares.

What one could debate, like max has been attempting (only to be told he doesn't know law, lmao), is whether or not one can punish people who pirate, download warez, host trackers, etc.

One could also debate, as has been done a million times, if the music industry has gained or lost money due to piracy, and whether or not their sales would increase if piracy was, say, reduced by 50%.

Howerver, debating piracy-morals is such a waste of time. It always results in people getting up on their moral high-horses thinking they're superior to others, while the rest don't fucking care.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/26774/flickricon.png https://twitter.com/phoenix/favicon.ico

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard