736

It seems so strange to me that we are locked in battle with providers mining our lives for whatever, and we have to work our asses off trying to stay anonymous, to the point of being denied service (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 10 months ago by Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

130 comments fedilink hide all child comments

or even pseudo-incriminated for attempting to maintain our own life.

It seems so stupid that I'm like a suspect for wanting an exchange of information without dropping my pants and bending over. No, I don't want cookies. Yes I want to read the article but no, I don't want to "sign up."

It makes me feel like being a f*cking hermit. But I prefer to pirate. Even though I'm not that good at it. Screw them. I got two private trackers, a VPN, and I hope that's enough.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Jarix@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Please stop doing this. It just gives bad actors better tools to fuck content creators.

If ads arent chosen and paid to the content creators directly then its a damned cancer on the entire industry and you, by giving them this, are supporting wage theft at best and exploitation at worst

How many content creators have been demonetized for no reason at all yet ads are still injected into their content anyway?

Sorry for being angry about this, but if we as a whole accept this then we are watching enshitification in action and im sick of the amazing thing that is the internet continually get worse

[-] CallumWells@lemmy.ml -2 points 10 months ago

No, I fully believe you're making different issues into one, which is dishonest argumentation.

Adblockers are functionally equivalent to piracy, the fact that some entities abuse others is a different issue. It's the same as with gambling mechanics in games, the fact that most people would think that those are predatory and bad does not change that not paying for the game is piracy. It's possible to be more nuanced about things than to group everything together.

Your spelling also doesn't help your credibility

[-] Jarix@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

If you can't see past someone's spelling mistakes then your credibility is the one I think is in question. Just ask me to fix it if the meaning is unclear or ambiguous instead of attacking my credibility(pot kettle black). Perhaps I did make some spelling mistakes, but do you know if english is even my first or third language?

It's interesting that you both tell me not to connect one issue and also its downstream effects, but then turn around and say that my argument lacks nuance(if that's a fair summary of your response, as I take it to be)

I'm saying that calling adblocking piracy has downstream effects that complicate the larger issue of the enshitification of the internet in general, and you want to boil things down to a simple binary of circumvention, i assume. But I reject the statement that adblockers are piracy without explanation.

So please, explain it so that the basis for this opinion can be understood instead of simply repeating it. What is it that makes adblocking equate to piracy in your opinion?

I'm passionate about this. I see it very much like a repeat of introducing micro transactions in the form of DLC into gaming which ruined gaming for me and many other people. Enshitification seems rampant these day. I believe that ive seen it in action before and that im seeing it again with this idea that adblocking is piracy.

[-] CallumWells@lemmy.ml -1 points 10 months ago

Oh, I could see past your errors, I was just pointing it out. Errors do not help credibility, almost ever. (There might be some times it does, but I'm not sure I would want to gain credibility with people that would take such as helping my credibility). If you disagree with this I don't know what to tell you. I also didn't actually attack your credibility (I don't really think you have any, but that's a different matter), but made an observation that you could make sure your writing is better to not detract from your credibility. With the amount of tools available to avoid spelling mistakes it doesn't really matter whether English isn't a language one is perfectly proficient in.

I have clearly expressed what makes adblocking equate to piracy. It's in the first paragraph of the first comment of mine you replied to. It should be fairly straight forward. Consuming without paying.

I reject your premise that it's like microtransactions in gaming, unless you specifically mean in "free" games. Of course microtransactions and a lot of DLC for paid games are enshittification, but that's more like asking you to pay more to access a new episode of a show or a scene from a show you've already paid for. Not near the same as having ads to pay for the costs of delivering content (and I include producing the content in "delivering" it).

Now, if you instead make the argument that the amount of ads or the contents of ads are enshittificating services that let you consume content without directly paying for it yourself I can agree. But not that ads themselves are enshittification. Nor that avoiding to pay to consume content isn't piracy. I just think it's self-deception to claim that not paying by blocking ads isn't piracy. I have also made it clear that I think blocking ads is perfectly reasonable and what should be done. It may not be piracy in the legal sense, but circumventing systems meant to pay for something seems perfectly in line with the colloquial sense of the word.

Somewhat of a tangent

Now, do I think the internet would be better if there were no ads at all? Yes, of course. But do you think it would be better that people would have to directly pay to use services on the internet instead? That would mean poorer people would be barred from a lot of online services. Because it costs something to host services on the internet and that has to be paid somehow. And people generally congregate to a small subset of sites which thus get a lot of traffic and thus high costs that has to be paid somehow. Sure, you could have some sites being public forums made available by government and thus "free to use" because they payment is through taxes, but that's generally not how businesses operate.

[-] Jarix@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

You either couldn't look past a couple of spelling errors or deliberately chose not to. My evidence? You commented on it and now we are talking about them. What was the point of mentioning it all if you were willing and able to ignore them.

You are a bad actor and you have shown what worth you are.

Go away.

Im done with you.

You have shown who you are and you arent just arent worth another thought

[-] CallumWells@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

You're more of a bad actor with your tantrums and rage-downvoting.

I wish you a better future.

EDIT: also to add that I simply made a note of it, specifically in a spoiler, while you were the one to try to make it into a conversation and talk about it. It really shows more about you than about me.