Random Rants 92 - Not Enough Snerk

Status
Not open for further replies.
Got a chocolate chip cookie from the nearby Whole Foods, which has an in-house bakery. Disappointing. Over-baked, or maybe was sitting in the display case too long. Not burned, but kind of hard to chew. :shake:
I suspect that we have a member here who could bake you excellent chocolate chip cookies.
 
Well, our thread starter says that there's not enough of you so perhaps we should just share what we have.

#§nerk
 
My @Snerk clones haven't been working out so far. They're just missing the magic of the original.

They're very tasty though.
 
I am inspired by an old Fairly Odd Parents episode to think that maybe we could just wring out some of the Snerk-essence to instil into these tasty Snerk-clones of yours.
 
mother speaks with the neighbour and it turns out it was one of recycling guys who have their cart thing , who tried to load the door before the neighbour shouted to stop him . Mostly Syrians these days ...
 
Okay, I've finally reached my breaking point with the supply-chain problems. I cannot find Huy Fong Chili Garlic Sauce at any of my usual grocery stores. I choose to blame Greg Abbott. I may have to make a detour through Chinatown on the way home tonight. I'm sure there's a secret entrance to the Harry Potter/Guillermo Del Toro underground market behind the case of frozen fake crab meat. I mean, nobody actually eats that stuff, do they?


Spoiler :
GUEST_68a77fc8-dc26-4a0c-bcc2-468fdeae7875
latest
 
About a month ago I ended up hearing an angry rant that started about piracy, specifically the piracy of old games that are 20+ years out of print that ended up including with them saying that getting anything for free is immoral because it deprives someone from making an excess profit, bringing up game demos, the public domain and anything that its creator gives away for free.

For game demos, they say it's immoral because you don't get to enjoy a sample of something for free without paying for it first. "You don't watch the first ten minutes of a film for free just to see if you like it or not. If you want to try a game, buy it first and if you don't like it, sell it."

For the public domain, just because something has reached a certain age doesn't mean that someone can no longer make a profit from it, even if the original creator is long dead. Just because someone like Charles Dickens is dead doesn't give people the right to read his works for free. If copies of his works still exist, someone can make a profit from it and by reading a copy for free, you are denying that person from making a profit from selling that work and that's immoral, even if the only copies of it in existence are too expensive for anyone to buy. There is no right to have any work preserved, that's just an excuse.

For something where the original creator gives something away for free, they consider that selfish because it deprives someone else from being able to make a profit from their work. If a band or a musician decides to give their music away for free, it deprives a record company and record stores from being able to make a profit from their work. They don't care if the original creators make any money from their own work or not.

Depriving someone from making an excess profit is stealing.

"If you don't like it, tough. You have no right to anything. Morality is black and white. Anyone who disagrees just wants stuff for free."
 
The first part is sensible, the second... rather not.
Although it needs to be considered that it might not be possible anymore to find someone who rightfully can make a profit from it, in which case free-ing it up should be legit (and in at least some copyright jurisdictions there are such rules).
 
The first part is sensible, the second... rather not.
Although it needs to be considered that it might not be possible anymore to find someone who rightfully can make a profit from it, in which case free-ing it up should be legit (and in at least some copyright jurisdictions there are such rules).

They don't care about who may legally own the rights, but that it's immoral to make it free. If copies exist, then whoever owns those copies has the right to make an excess profit. Making it free deprives those people from making a profit and that's stealing.
 
No idea if I can justify or not it but I feel that the moral implications of piracy fades with the age of the item being pirated. I have zero problems with pirating old films or old games. Perhaps I should but I definitely don't. Newer stuff is a different matter all together.
 
They don't care about who may legally own the rights, but that it's immoral to make it free. If copies exist, then whoever owns those copies has the right to make an excess profit. Making it free deprives those people from making a profit and that's stealing.

Wait... but logically... isn't someone else making profit from something which should be free also stealing?
 
They don't care about who may legally own the rights, but that it's immoral to make it free. If copies exist, then whoever owns those copies has the right to make an excess profit. Making it free deprives those people from making a profit and that's stealing.
Last i checked, Civilization 2 MGE on amazon was like $730
 
this week it seems am a drone maker . Previous and reportedly better than you know which , designed by the company of you know who . Considering it will be the chief PR in the coming elections so important that tens of thousands of people might decide to emigrate to London with the loot , this trick is like deadly ! Must be really stealthy . Now that Kiev like would not expect to have any and only Rusdian drones are of lsraeli pattern with water bottle caps used to save money ...
 
Wait... but logically... isn't someone else making profit from something which should be free also stealing?

Making a profit from someone else's work isn't stealing, it's moral. That's actually their ideal job.

They also have this idea that if anyone gives away what they've created for free, it means that whatever they've created isn't any good. The only reason to create anything is to make a profit, to give it away means that you know it won't make a profit because it isn't any good. Calling it a passion project or a labour of love are just excuses to make up for a lack of talent, because someone who has talent doesn't create because they want to create, but because they only see it as work to make a profit.

Last i checked, Civilization 2 MGE on amazon was like $730

No one has a right to Civilization 2 MGE. If you want the game you'll have to buy it for $730. It doesn't matter if the original developer or publisher gets any of that money. Getting that game for free is stealing as it deprives whoever is reselling that game from making an excess profit.
 
Making a profit from someone else's work isn't stealing, it's moral. That's actually their ideal job.

That would rather seem to be exploitation, no?
Like... slavery.

They also have this idea that if anyone gives away what they've created for free, it means that whatever they've created isn't any good. The only reason to create anything is to make a profit, to give it away means that you know it won't make a profit because it isn't any good. Calling it a passion project or a labour of love are just excuses to make up for a lack of talent, because someone who has talent doesn't create because they want to create, but because they only see it as work to make a profit.

Don't tell that Github :lol:.
Or the US federal government :lol:, since anything what a US federal employee produces is in the public domain, and therefore free to use (e.g. pictures from NASA).
Or Volvo, who made the seatbelt free.

Well, you know what we here say about your friends anyways.
 
I worked hard and created a bunch of money in my bank account. I can't give it away for free? I have to sell it at a profit? Seems silly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom