I now pirate for ethical and moral reasons.

[RobertX]

If you're as determined as that, more power to you.

[waregim]

Not buying their apps is only one response.

Denying them your metadata is probably more important.
Learn to use a firewall/hosts file/ blocklists (AdBlocker is a good start).

[soulcity]

Not buying their apps is only one response.

Denying them your metadata is probably more important.
Learn to use a firewall/hosts file/ blocklists (AdBlocker is a good start).

There are apps and then there are APPS

The pathetic stupid app that I used to organize my MP3s is really low level.  

Apps like Contact Tracers are the kind of crap I'm fighting to keep off.  I'll destroy my phone before I allow that stuff on my phone.

[Fant0men]

After seeing what the media company giants did to the Pirate Bay founders (especially anakata), and after seeing them shutting down one site after another. And before BitTorrent, one filesharing network after another (starting with Napster)... I always pirate my shit unless I'm looking for something super rare that no one has uploaded yet, or perhaps when there's no high quality rip, i.e. no 1080p BDrip for movies or no FLAC rip for music albums... I only buy my entertainment when I'm desperate for quality. Luckily, we have a lot of competent release groups / uploaders who understand and prioritize quality. So me actually having to buy shit is rare indeed.

Fuck these fucking companies. They are the middlemen standing between the consumer and the artist / creator. They are leeches who produce nothing of their own, but make profits off other people's work, people who have a soul and are therefore able to create good things. The middlemen have been obsolete ever since the Internet was invented. They are dinosaurs who are going extinct and they know it. These fuckers make more money than they could ever possibly spend, and yet they bitch and moan like a bunch of whiny fucking cunts. What they're doing is evil. They brainwash the public into believing file-sharing is theft. It's not theft. All you're doing is making a copy. The media giants are against the free flow of information. Hence, they are enemies of progress and want nothing more than to stifle technological progress. At least now they've finally realized that they should cash in (by releasing streaming services). Look at how fucking long that took them. They aren't very bright. They aren't losing money because of file-sharing, but I'd argue they probably make more money because of it due to the increased exposure they get. They are just so greedy that they want to squeeze the tit for that extra drop of USD, by suing small-time file-sharers (for gazillions of dollars) who shared one Britney Spears song or one Marvel movie.

The vast majority of the money you pay for a movie or music album is going to the middlemen, NOT to the creators. They are getting fucked no matter if you buy stuff or not.

I'm so glad BitTorrent exists, as I watched the Machiavellian media companies shut down one thing after another, until finally, we got a protocol that they can't kill, and which makes it harder for them to prosecute individuals as well, due to the fragmented way in which the BitTorrent protocol operates, getting one bit here and another bit there (from different peers). All they can really do these days is to shut down trackers and sites that link to torrents and magnet links, but they can't kill BitTorrent itself. It's a hydra that grows twenty new heads each time one gets cut off. And thank god for that. BitTorrent has been going strong for two decades, and I'm grateful.

No one should feel like they're a bad person for sharing information. Sharing is caring, and anyone trying to tell you otherwise is just a selfish cunt who's trying to manipulate you.

Besides, there's the greater problem of our system as a whole. If our world wasn't based on money, we would have no need for copyright, and hence people could create out of the sheer joy of being creative, and only produce things that they're really passionate about. If money wasn't the motive, we would instantly get rid of the generic mainstream garbage, and the only thing that would remain is quality. Well, nearly, anyway. There would still exist those people who believe they can sing but can't, though we would be rid of the "content creators" who are only in it for the money.

I have no actual ideas for a better system, than one based on money. Though, one step forward could be universal basic income worldwide, which would instantly raise the bar, as no one would ever have to worry about not having food or shelter, and hence could focus on what they want to do with their lives instead. They could all follow their dreams.

This would improve the situation not only for media content, but for software as well, as more programmers would gravitate towards open source, as programming would be all about creating the best possible software to get peer recognition as an awesome programmer. People could still get rich, but money would no longer be the sole purpose for doing things. We wouldn't have monopolistic software companies where soulless monkeys in suits decide what the programmers should do. The people who actually do the work would no longer get abused like that.

[waregim]

Nationalize banks, and corporations over 200 workers. Forbid financials from exceeding 2% of GDP. Forbid resale of debt. Forbid short selling, and derivatives. Impose capital controls. Put the military to work in manufacturing strategic materials. And change the constitution to insist to BINDING plebiscites from local to national on all important issues. With blockchain voting a republic is unnecessary when one can have a real democracy. Also known as socialism. The real and not the Fabian bullshit.

But most of all *incentivize* productivity, even in a UBI system. This is where the Soviets failed. If you could work twice as fast as your coworkers, you were expected to, and at the same pay. And insist on limited terms and revolving doors between management and production. No 'shareholders' running things. And workers votiing for managers. This would help avoid the beaurocratic rot that the Russian system faced, since managers were afraid of innovation since any mistakes would cost them their jobs.

[soulcity]

Nationalize banks, and corporations over 200 workers. Forbid financials from exceeding 2% of GDP. Forbid resale of debt. Forbid short selling, and derivatives. Impose capital controls. Put the military to work in manufacturing strategic materials. And change the constitution to insist to BINDING plebiscites from local to national on all important issues. With blockchain voting a republic is unnecessary when one can have a real democracy. Also known as socialism. The real and not the Fabian bullshit.

But most of all *incentivize* productivity, even in a UBI system. This is where the Soviets failed. If you could work twice as fast as your coworkers, you were expected to, and at the same pay. And insist on limited terms and revolving doors between management and production. No 'shareholders' running things. And workers votiing for managers. This would help avoid the beaurocratic rot that the Russian system faced, since managers were afraid of innovation since any mistakes would cost them their jobs.

• Get rid of all central banks /federal reserve
  
• No more government regulations
  
• Create laws that forbid government interference in private contracts
  
• Imprison all government lobbyists
  
• No more social welfare
  
• Extremely liberal gun laws (You want a gun then buy anyone you want no licensing required)
  
• Bank notes instead of a national currency
  
• Limit government size and power to being only agency that verifies the weights and measures
  
• Privatize everything including law enforcement, military, prisons and judicial system.
  

• Forbid all politics in universities
  
• Close 99% of colleges
  
• Trade school instead of high school
  

[waregim]

Privatization is the crux of the problem. Smith and Ricardo, the founders of Economics, and the term 'Free Market' knew full well that the moment Rentiers were permitted to control a system, there were no more free markets, and the final result was Feudalism.
Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
Smith was writing in an era of *Mercantilism*, where such things as fair markets could exist, but this was also an era where governments were financed by tariffs, and land was taxed by its numbers of cows, shoats, closets, and even trees. Mules would cause the highest tax burden. There was no personal income tax.

They spoke from experience with the East India company, financial scams that wiped out nations, and most importantly, the closure of the Commons.

The main purpose of government of to protect us from the 'privatizers' aka privateers. You know, the skull and crossbones folks. The real ones, not the software kind.

In no way shape or form will any public benefit ever emerge from corporate institutions, who are obliged by law to act in the interest only of their shareholders. It wasnt that way always. Our Founding Fathers took for granted their system that a corporation could only be contracted for the public good, and then only for a certain period of time before the charter expired.

Its how Andy jackson killed the Second US Bank (the Fed is the third).
He refused to renew their charter. As it was not for the public good.

The banks are already emitting money. Everytime they make a loan, they are creating 90% of that amount *from nothing*.
Its the heart of the system. its called leverage, and the scope of it is determined by the Bank of International Settlements. In Switzerland.
Constitutionally the only folks permitted to issue currency is the Treasury. Kennedy was the last to issue Treasury Notes. Since then it is issued solely by the Federal Reserve. A consortium of private banks with the government only appointing the chairman, and possesing a *minority* voting position. These people make fortunes on both sides of their pump and dump scams. There is alot of money to be made in depressions. Think shorts.

Social Security and Nationalized Health s the ultimate national defense. The military is a useless appendage in a nuclear era.

Privatize prisons? Been there, done that. the result is a system where the corporations put quotas to be filled, and 'reward' judges for sending kids to jail for things like drawing pictures of guns.

I would rather have a lazy civil service chowderhead in charge of of all socially necessary functions than a corporate bean counter who could care less about people, and is only looking to cut costs to increase profits. Efficiency for them is the opposite of benefit for us.

Unrestrained capitalism turns nations ultimately into shitholes like Mexico. You would have more political and economic freedoms in communist China.

And do you really want a system where you can be charged thousands for a simple wuflu test that is profitable at $2 in other countries. $6 for the same pill that costs 6c when used for sheep? Thats the 'free' market for you.

No government regulations? Well we can return to 19th century England there candy stores replaced the sugar in chocolates with powdered lead, because it was cheaper.

However, in fairness, today they use HFCS, a slow systemic poison.

[RobertX]

Political and economic freedoms in China.

You, my friend, are a good satirist.

EDIT: OK never mind, thank you.

[waregim]

You know more about China than I do. So think a bit on this question:
Is their repressive system a result of their economic system, or the cultural attitudes in their political system?

A comparison:
An example is the word *Freedom*.
The US was founded on the idea of 'freedom FROM things. Puritans from Anglicans. New England grocers from British limited tea concessions. Settlers from injun attacks. Personal freedoms were never much an issue, and dictated as rightly belonging to those who had the most wealth. A heritage from the English. Therefore slavery and trivial imprisonment were never considered all that contradictory to Founding principles. Here we have some truly savage laws for what are truly minor 'offenses'. A person san be sent to jail for life for stealing a slice of pizza three times.
Everything allowed except that forbidden.

I believe the Chinese have a different persspective on these issues.

Am I right?

[RobertX]

I just know that they did what they did. Maybe you know more than me, but I call a spade a spade.

It's really pointless to argue once someone's mind is made up, so all the power to you.

EDIT: You and I have different opinions, and you and I will always have different opinions, no matter how we try to argue about a point.

So, I guess, forgive me for extending a harmless joke, because I realise that it escapes you.

EDIT: Anyhow, we are, once again, dancing in the property of someone's post. Perhaps it's my fault for making that joke, or else the topic won't spiral, for the second time, out of control.

I take the blame, and I guess it's for me to apologise that I have negative opinions with China.