121–130 of 150 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's been Adobe's business model for a long time, and a very clever one at that. Let Photoshop be pirated all over schools and unis, reap the enterprise benefits when the graphics designers who only learned Photoshop are getting hired.
Yep. Creative Cloud subscriber through work right here. Well done, Adobe.
Also, I, like most teens in the early 2000s, had a pirated copy of Photoshop 7.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree with #1 (cf my other comment in the thread regarding Adobe's MO). But you'll get your point across better if you quit the snark, that is all. Re #2: That's the funniest conspiracy theory I've heard all year. But don't take it from me - I edit tvtropes so I'm in on it too. Oops. That was snark. :)
I write snarky comments targeting opinions that express my thinking in a concise and funny (for me at least) way. Then you come and tell me to fix my attitude, directly judging my person. At no point did I judge you or used ad hominems. >But you'll get your point across better if you quit the snark, that is all. I'm not interested in getting my point accross, just in having fun. People have different objectives. Why…
Maybe my objective is to tell you what you should do and you shouldn't judge my objectives? I don't know.
There's assumptions you have to make if you want to have a healthy conversation. For example, the assumption that when someone enters a conversation as an active participant, they're not just here to waste everyone's time. That's essentially trolling.
> correlations
Just because you have "links between TV exposure and bad school grades" doesn't mean "TV shows are made to keep people as uneducated imbeciles". If I told you there's a link between knife usage and missing fingers, would you tell me knives are made to reduce the average amount of fingers?
> a logical fallacy intended to ridicule while avoiding to answer the argument.
If you don't want to be ridiculed and want your points to be answered seriously, maybe you shouldn't be so snarky all the time and hear people out when they tell you to stop.
You can't have it both ways. You can't be an arse to everybody and then expect them to treat you with respect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I write snarky comments targeting opinions that express my thinking in a concise and funny (for me at least) way. Then you come and tell me to fix my attitude, directly judging my person. At no point did I judge you or used ad hominems. >But you'll get your point across better if you quit the snark, that is all. I'm not interested in getting my point accross, just in having fun. People have different objectives. Why…
> Why do you want so much to tell me what I should do? Maybe my objective is to tell you what you should do and you shouldn't judge my objectives? I don't know. There's assumptions you have to make if you want to have a healthy conversation. For example, the assumption that when someone enters a conversation as an active participant, they're not just here to waste everyone's time. That's essentially trolling. > corre…
"Digital colonialism" is almost as silly a concept as cultural appropriation, which is what the Angolans are doing in a very direct sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The distinction is whether the creator wants to profit from it or give it away.
So what if I want to sell a text that is also hate speech?
"Digital colonialism" is almost as silly a concept as cultural appropriation, which is what the Angolans are doing in a very direct sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's training users to only use their products, and by the time access becomes cheaper, those products will be able to crowd out any competitors. It also means that any local competitors don't get fair treatment, and will automatically lose to these services provided by the 'colonials'.
Is that an argument that makes any sense in the context of Wikipedia? Where users actually form the content itself, and where access and content are free anyway everywhere?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what if I want to sell a text that is also hate speech?
I don't think you'd have many customers, but I'm sure there are at least a few white supremacist periodicals making money in the US.