R2R cracks Helix Native

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lol man.. If you guys get this worked up over someone playing guitar with an unlicensed product belonging to a multi million dollar corporation, that she would never be able to afford anyway...
I can't even imagine what a massecre it must be when your land lord comes by on rent day.
Or when your boss hands you your paycheck.

.. Or is it only horizontal and lower class agression that gets you off?
Maybe it's not really theft your worried about..
 
The straw man army is out in force. First-world thieves will always find justification for their sense of entitlement, no matter how twisted. Some even imply that theft from someone who you perceive as having more than you is somehow moral and heroic. Pathetic. Theft is theft. A generation of entitled thieves has emerged, sustained by their mutual support for each other's lack of ethics. Corruption shared is corruption justified. Narcissism at its worst.
 
iaresee said:
My finger is hovering over the thread close button...
Click to expand...
Understandable. But consider this thread an important illustration of the type of people that Fractal and others are up against. When users on your own forum are proud to publicly proclaim that they steal software, and even that honest consumers are chumps, you have a thread worth viewing IMO.
 
Jason Scott said:
If you can explain how a software company is losing money on someone who downloads software illegally even though said individual would never purchase said software assuming they had the money, please do.
Click to expand...
You're trying to shift the burden of proof. You're the one who made the claim that:
Jason Scott said:
In the case of a pirate who has absolutely no intention of ever purchasing a piece of software regardless, the developer isn't actually losing money.
Click to expand...
You made a claim. The onus is on you to provide justification for that. Not with me to disprove it.
 
steadystate said:
The straw man army is out in force. First-world thieves will always find justification for their sense of entitlement, no matter how twisted. Some even imply that theft from someone who you perceive as having more than you is somehow moral and heroic. Pathetic. Theft is theft. A generation of entitled thieves has emerged, sustained by their mutual support for each other's lack of ethics. Corruption shared is corruption justified. Narcissism at its worst.
Click to expand...
Excellent post. They'll do all kinds of verbal gymnastics to muddy the waters.
 
hippietim said:
Please, enlighten us on the various ways you find stealing acceptable. This should be awesome.
Click to expand...

Go ahead and pm me if you really want to talk politics. But I don't see why you would.

Also anyone in this thread who was also in the misogynist thread take over a few months back, that might give you a clue that youre on the wrong side of the issue again.
 
B:ASSMASTER said:
You're trying to shift the burden of proof. You're the one who made the claim that:

You made a claim. The onus is on you to provide justification for that. Not with me to disprove it.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that a company loses money on software that is downloaded illegally by individuals who have absolutely no intention of purchasing said software regardless whether they do or do not possess the means to do so?
 
Last edited:
B:ASSMASTER said:
Excellent post. They'll do all kinds of verbal gymnastics to muddy the waters.
Click to expand...
You and @steadystate are all like "no, it's the ones with a more nuanced understanding who are wrong!".

Because throughout history, the guy ferousciously pushing a more authoritarian, generalized, moral based view point is always on the right side... Right?
 
Nuanced...... I would be interested in the work that you do for a living and whether you would view it as "nuanced" if someone stole from you whether that be physical tools, software etc...... Steadystate is exactly right.
 
Jason Scott said:
Do you believe that a company loses money on software that is downloaded illegally by individuals who have absolutely no intention of purchasing said software regardless whether they do or do not possess the means to do so?
Click to expand...
I'm not an economist, and my college days are bit in my past, but I believe the answer can be argued as "yes". It's called opportunity cost. There is a loss of revenue to the company because the thief chose an alternative choice to actually buying the software. More information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom