Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A

Alk

@ Alk @lemmy.world

Posts
8
Comments
406
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I want my smart Android TV to be dumb again

    Jump

  • We need more dumb tv's in the higher price class.

  • Drug makers can’t make knockoff weight-loss drugs anymore—and they’re mad

    Jump

  • They were in too deep to give up, the only way forward was down.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • That's because it's the same argument. Both sayings are stupid, not because of the message behind them but because of their uselessness in actual conversation with anyone who might disagree. It's just circlejerking at that point, only shareable and discussable with people who already agree or know what it really is supposed to mean.

    Do you know what someone who disagrees hears when I say ACAB? They hear me calling millions of people I've never met a mean name. It doesn't matter what I want it to mean. Even if I explain to them what it is supposed to mean (the conversation probably wouldn't even get that far), the fact stands that I called millions of people I've never met a mean name. And that's all anyone needs to dismiss my argument.

    The whole point of these phrases is to spread the message to people who either don't care or disagree. And they are NOT effective at that very specific thing. These phrases are fine at letting people who already agree pat each other on the back though. These phrases push away the target audience.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I actually tried steep a while ago (maybe 6 months?) and refunded it because I couldn't play offline. I was looking to scratch that SSX Tricky itch and it definitely did not do it for me. Ended up just emulating Tricky, but damn I want a remake or sequel.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • Yeah that's true. I have no creative bone in my body so I can't even offer an alternative to the catch phrase I am calling out, unfortunately haha

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • From all of these replies, I'm getting the feeling that people generally don't understand that the phrase is objectively incorrect, whether or not they agree with its sentiment (which they all do, at least around here). So I am questioning the overall effectiveness of sharing it. But like you said, I think it's here to stay specifically because everyone seems to agree with the sentiment behind it so much, without considering it objectively.

    We're getting to a bigger picture here which I can't even speculate on, but at least I learned something about this particular narrative. I just hope this meme doesn't do too much harm when people get into debates with others that disagree.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I think we're talking about two different things here.

    I agree that they have shitty predatory business practices. However, you did not sign an EULA saying that you could take their property. So even if they do take the things you bought from them away, you would be out of luck. The thing that needs to change is not allowing that to be classified as "buying".

    What I'm talking about is "if buying isn't owning" having anything to do with "then piracy isn't stealing". Buying not being owning is a great reason to pirate. Still doesn't make piracy any more legal.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I agree that it's a good reason to pirate, but the meme/phrase is ostensibly trying to use the definition of owning to change the definition of stealing.

    It doesn't prove anything, it just gives a good reason why people are pirating, when it looks like it's trying to prove some logical relationship of the concepts.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • Oops, replied to the wrong comment chain here. Continue your wrath, it is righteous.

    I mean, I agree, but what does that have to do with the relationship between buying + owning and piracy + stealing? Ubisoft being shitty is a great reason to pirate, but it does not change the definition of piracy.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I agree with everything you said, however that has nothing to do with piracy. It's a shitty thing they're doing that we should be mad at, but it in no way sets the definition of piracy, which is what they're going to try to defend against in any argument.

    What we should demand is that they properly define buying, owning, and renting so that we own our products. Piracy is piracy no matter what the definition of owning is. Only the reasons change. One reason is that they treat buying as renting, but it does not change the definition of piracy, no matter what we think the definition is.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I can see that, that's a good point. However, it's so easy to misconstrue that phrase into an objective statement of "the relationship between buying and owning directly creates the relationship between piracy and stealing" and the average person, lawmaker, etc can easily get confused when the "ones who own all the content" try to disprove that statement even though it's not the statement we're trying to make.

    What is literally said in the meme is incorrect, even if it means something completely different. We need to say what we mean, not make a catchy analogy that's technically incorrect and easily used against us.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • Right, I agree with that, but "because if you copy something, you don't take it away from its owner" is a valid reason, and completely unrelated to the fact that buying isn't owning. Even if buying WAS owning in all situations, your comment would still be true. That's my point, the analogy in the meme is useless, and arguments like yours should be the main talking point.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • Exactly. This has always been a problem to some extent, but back then no company ever revoked that license or even cared what people did with it unless they sold pirated copies. So it wasn't a problem for us either.

  • Sorry Ubisoft

    Jump

  • I fully agree with the general message, but this particular anecdote doesn't really make sense to me and can easily be waved off by anyone who disagrees with it.

    If buying isn't owning, that means it's renting or borrowing.

    If you pirate it, they get no money and therefore cannot rent it out to you. You cannot just steal a movie from the movie rental store or a car from a car rental place. That's stealing.

    Sure, it's infinitely reproducible but that's not what this meme says. That's an unrelated argument for piracy. It draws a direct connection between the 2 relationships of buying + owning and pirating + stealing. However, one has nothing to do with the other.

    When someone owns something, they are allowed to rent it out and take it back at any time. It's always been that way and that's valid.

    The real argument should be "if there was no intention to buy in the first place, then piracy isn't stealing" or something like that.

    Let me rephrase. I agree that piracy isn't stealing, but the fact that buying isn't owning does NOT prove that at all, nor does it have anything to do with it. It's a reason people pirate, sure, but it in no way proves that piracy isn't stealing. The phrase is an if;then statement. If one thing is true, it MEANS the other is true, which just isn't the case. Both can be true sure, but proving the first half does not prove the second half. Making one true does not instantly make the other true.

    This will not make anyone at ubisoft mad. In fact, they will be glad that such a poorly crafted argument is being used against them, since it's 0 effort to disprove and dismiss it. We should raise other arguments that are logically sound if we want to convince anyone - friends, family, lawmakers - of anything.

    Am I completely missing the point or is this analogy completely nonsensical?

    On a side note, I condone piracy and nobody should ever give money to large media corporations. But if we use stupid arguments like this it makes us easier to dismiss.

    Edit: I'm looking for discussion here. If you're going to downvote me, at least tell me why you think my argument is wrong. I'm here to learn.

  • Is it just me or do all search engines feel soooo bad these days?

    Jump

  • You do it once.

  • Water gushes through sand dunes after a rare rainfall in the Sahara desert

    Jump

  • Bad bot.

  • Top 10 Anime of the Season - Summer 2024 (Anime Corner)

    Jump

  • I can't believe monogatari isn't even on here. What?

  • Just a reminder of how powerful the whois command is and what it can say

    Jump

  • I recommend https://njal.la/ for a privacy respecting domain name provider. It was established by The Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde.

  • This man is a parody of himself

    Jump

  • I like to think that he forgets, keeps trying and then makes a new post about it

  • Lemmy Shitpost @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    Just picked up a new hat from the game store. Can't wait to get home from vacation and play, I've been waiting for months for this game!

  • linuxmemes @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    My impression of github since switching to Linux

  • Mander @mander.xyz
    Alk @lemmy.world

    I constantly get errors loading images.

  • Voyager @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    Feature request - tap to dismiss images

  • Home Automation @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    Ideas for what image to put on my security touch screen panel?

  • [Migrated, see pinned post] Casual Conversation @lemm.ee
    Alk @lemmy.world

    I want to thank everyone on Lemmy.

  • TenForward: Where Every Vulcan Knows Your Name @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    The Vulkan Science Directorate has... Wait a minute...

  • Boost for Lemmy @lemmy.world
    Alk @lemmy.world

    Feature Request

    lemmy.world /post/5908865