491–500 of 519 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not hypocritical for an article about crossing someone else's red line to simultaneously be crossing your red line.
Depicting deceased people with AI is objectively distasteful, especially from a self-described "ad guy" who should know better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While it may not be totally sensible, using AI imagery to depict something that never happened definitely does decrease trust. The exact same effect can be seen happening in sports as they added gambling on top. People are losing faith that the truth hasn’t been manipulated because there is ample opportunity to break trust and insert fiction.
What decreases trust is taking something innocent and blowing it out of proportion, then using it to attack people.
It doesn’t matter if they actually cheated at sports or if the image is real. The threat of it being untrustworthy is actively eroding trust.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kindles have been showing ads on their lock screen for the ad-supported tier for a very long time now. These days, we have moved to far more insane schemes. E.g. smart TV manufacturers are patenting detection of static frames to show you ads while TV is idle (although I don't think anyone has actually shipped that yet).
> Kindles have been showing ads on their lock screen for the ad-supported tier for a very long time now. Wow, this is wild. I've also remembered that Viber puts ads among your chats in a chats list. It shocked me first time I've seen that. > patenting As I understand, big companies are making lots of patents, and most of those never come to life.
https://www.wired.com/story/roku-tests-showing-video-ads-bef...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The worst part of it is that despite all this, Apple still has the least frustrating desktop experience overall, at least for the casual user who needs things to "just work", because the bar is plummeting that fast. Especially when looking at Windows.
AI will soon make this difference (if it even exists) irrelevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh simple. Remove the glass and I pick the lock of the front door to your home and walk in at night while you, your wife and your kids are fast asleep and I scan the book that I want with a portable scanner. Not just one book. Many book across many nights. No damage done right? Once your wife and you find out that that’s all I’m doing you guys are totally ok with this. > Which isn't a sufficient explanation if it doe…
Are you okay mate? Frankly your comments are absolutely unhinged. And that's not a value judgement, that's an observation.
It is the same genre as:
“I am genuinely confused how someone could think this.” Translation: I am calling you stupid.
or
“This feels emotional rather than reasoned.” Translation: I have no counterargument.
You are not being kind. You are being condescending while wearing a cardigan of civility. It is the approved HN way of calling someone unwell without saying the word stupid directly. Very on brand. Very polite venom.
If you think my point is wrong, say why. If you cannot, do not hide behind a wellness check.
So yes, I am okay. Are you okay? Because it seems like making eye contact with your own reasoning gave you altitude sickness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh simple. Remove the glass and I pick the lock of the front door to your home and walk in at night while you, your wife and your kids are fast asleep and I scan the book that I want with a portable scanner. Not just one book. Many book across many nights. No damage done right? Once your wife and you find out that that’s all I’m doing you guys are totally ok with this. > Which isn't a sufficient explanation if it doe…
> Oh simple. Remove the glass and I pick the lock of the front door to your home and walk in at night while you, your wife and your kids are fast asleep and I scan the book that I want with a portable scanner. Not just one book. Many book across many nights. No damage done right? Once your wife and you find out that that’s all I’m doing you guys are totally ok with this. So now you want to replace the things that are…
Oh I see. You think the physical break-in imagery is the problem, not the behavior itself. Cute. The point flew over your head so hard it’s now in low Earth orbit.
Nobody is saying the method is identical. The point is the moral equivalence. If you want a book that you do not have, and you obtain it without permission, the only difference between burglary and piracy is how easy it is to lie to yourself afterward.
Digital theft just comes pre-laundered. No broken window. No police report. Just a clean conscience and a folder named “Book_Final_FINAL2.pdf.”
>Your analogy is barely even an analogy. It’s pretty obvious what the physical equivalent would be. You’d make a copy of the paperback as a hardcover, yourself in your own place with your own materials.
Fantastic. And where exactly are you getting the paperback to copy, professor? Are you growing it in a hydroponic book farm? Summoning it from the astral plane? Wishing really, really hard?
To “make your own copy at home” you must first acquire the book. And if you do not buy it or borrow it, you steal it. Congratulations. You have just walked right back into the house at night with a scanner, only you changed the lighting and think the ethics changed with it.
The source is the theft. Not the printing method. This is not subtle. You are just allergic to saying it out loud.
>Which is why it would make a lot of sense for the companies selling this stuff to care about and do everything they can to retain that good will, right?
Yes, and they do, and pirates still pirate. Spotify. Steam. Netflix. Apple Books. Kindle. Platforms with instantaneous, frictionless, brain-dead-simple purchasing flows already exist.
And people still torrent. Because the UX excuse was never the real reason. It was just the most socially presentable one.
People do not need better UX. They need better courage to say: “I wanted it and I took it.”
>Were the people saying they were returning to piracy not admitting they were returning to piracy, or were they just explaining what it would take to make them not?
No. They were explaining how to preserve their self image while returning to piracy.
They were not saying: “I pirate.” They were saying: “I pirate but I am still a good person because I have constructed a beautiful little narrative terrarium where I am the protagonist of justice.”
This thread is not about piracy. It is about delusion.
⸻
Let me say it plainly so your brain has no escape hatch:
To read a book you do not have, you must obtain it. If you obtain it without permission in the physical world, you break in somewhere. If you obtain it without permission in the digital world, you click a link.
The click feels cleaner, so you tell cleaner stories.
The ethics never changed. Only the lighting did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Setup is tricky first time and permissions can be a horror, but after that it’s ‘Rrs doing it all. Sonarr, Radarr etc. it’s all automated and if you use lists you don’t actually touch it unless adding a new series, it just works.
Same with paying for your software. One time setup and it just works afterwards, but easier. I use stremio with pirate plugins which provides basically an identical experience to Netflix. Don’t even need a setup. I think you get it though. You use Usenet because you don’t want to pay right? Pure and simple.
The piracy setup costs far more to run the streaming services.
I do it for the quality and the all in 1 nature. I pay for the streaming services too, which makes me feel less bad about it. I should cut one or the other, but haven’t yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same with paying for your software. One time setup and it just works afterwards, but easier. I use stremio with pirate plugins which provides basically an identical experience to Netflix. Don’t even need a setup. I think you get it though. You use Usenet because you don’t want to pay right? Pure and simple.
I pay for usenet indexers and access, VPNs and Plex. I also pay for Netflix, Sky for Appletv. The piracy setup costs far more to run the streaming services. I do it for the quality and the all in 1 nature. I pay for the streaming services too, which makes me feel less bad about it. I should cut one or the other, but haven’t yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has stopped caring and producing local/personal software for a while now. Which is absolutely brain dead because that was the primary reason to buy their hardware in the first place. Why spend the premium for a Mac if you are going to run some shitty cloud software anyway. For now the illusion is maintained because they are dominating with their chips, but that won't last forever and the competition is almost c…
In general their products weren't that great, hence why they almost went bankrupt. They only played nice during the time they were getting back into the game
And indeed this is the period when they did play quite nice but I don't think it was only to get back in the game. I think Steve Jobs really had a goal, a "higher-purpose" towards offering elegant, powerful and easy to use computing devices. If that wasn't true, he would never had started NeXT in the first place, this endeavor nearly bankrupted him, so it wasn't just about greed.
But nowadays the hardware products are quite good (often best in class) but they are way too greedy and very negligent towards what actually matters, the software (having good hardware that cannot run any good software is rather useless).