>So you're saying that when enough people are doing it, that it's okay? Or >perhaps that the concept of personal property and/or fixed standards of >acceptable/unacceptable behaviors is "outdated"? I don't think that this >type of argument is one I choose to accept (all your >"reasoned"/rationalized? arguments notwithstanding), no matter how many >anecdotal/unreferenced stories you come up with.
No, I'm saying that "okay" is an arbitrary (and moot) term when discussing something which is inevitable -- i.e., the eventual collapse of our monetary system due to the ability to freely replicate materials at zero cost. >I grew up in a culture >where there are right/wrong, acceptable/unacceptable standards, as well >as the concept that what one person has is not mine to take without >his/her permission. From my world view, to argue otherwise is only a >subtle form of anarchy. Exactly. "In my world view." My last sentence was telling: "One's world-view must change" in order to integrate oneself into a new way of thinking. The cultural standards of which you speak are exactly that: "cultural standards." They have no inherent reality, and are certainly no more or less superior than any other culture's standards. >So was it the law of supply and demand when the people in Oakland went >beserk because their team didn't win, by that kind of argument? C'mon >now!! Get real! Get real is right! Whoever said such a ludicrous thing? And how would you even get to such a ridiculous conclusion from what I was saying? Total non sequitur, there. That is so random. All I said was that the law of supply and demand dictates that when a product can be reproduced indefinitely at no cost to the reproducer, then it ceases to have a financial value. What this has to do with looting and the Oakland Raiders is beyond me. >So where is the incentive for a person to produce an artwork (song, >movie, painting,...) if any and everyone copy it and claim that they >'made' it? Where is the incentive for a shareware or freeware author to >write a well-crafted program or utility if there are no moral inhibitions >to keep another person from copying it, modifying the author credits, and >claiming that he/she wrote the program (or worse yet, modifying it into a >virus-producing program and then tarring the original author's reputation >as if he/she made the malicious one)? The incentive, as I have said three times already, would be to "improve oneself" and to make a contribution to the overall good of the society. Not to win material goods or get "credit" for what you've done. Simply to create the piece of artwork will have to be enough. Don't you see... this isn't a debate, it isn't an argument... it will HAVE to be enough. People will have no choice. Their art -- and physical goods -- will be able to be replicated indefinitely. Either change your mindset, or get hung up and depressed that the old ways have died. Complaining about it is fruitless. It's coming. Not in our lifetimes, mind you; but it is coming. >It WILL happen if enough people refuse to restrain themselves from >behavior which harms another person. You can call it what you like - but >this still sounds like nothing more than a dressed up argument for >anarchy - no standards, anything goes, kind of like Saddam Hussein might >make...:-( I would argue that the desire for the accummulation of wealth, material goods, and personal acclaim are the behaviors which cause the most harm to others. Your comment also shows a complete lack of knowledge of the political and economic system of Iraq. A military dictatorship is diametrically opposed to both anarchy, and to the utopian monetary-less society that will have to exist if we plan to survive into the future. Those economics classes that you say you never took? Here's some advice: take one. >Or it will have the backbone to say that if we don't like the price >someone thinks their product is worth, we either don't buy it and/or we >go out and spend our own time actually creating a new one like it (which >involves much more effort than just the -IMHO- lazy and >dishonest method of figuring how I can get around the rules). The >difficulty the record companies are running into is not just that people >are downloading music from Napster, since not everyone is, but rather >that people are getting fed up with the prices the companies are charging >and doing what I often do - going to the local used CD store and *buying* >what I want there (maybe after selling my CDs that weren't as good as >that one cut I heard was). Buying used CDs is just another "lazy and dishonest method of figuring out how to get around the rules." You are obtaining a piece of artwork without contributing any money to the individuals who created it or distributed it. Just like trading music on the web. That's why the RIAA is opposed to used CD sales just like it's opposed to file sharing. So look in the mirror before you start throwing stones. >Is your argument basically "I don't wanna, and as soon as enough people >agree with me, I'm gonna do what I want"? 'Cause you're not convincing me >with your mumbo-jumbo and alleged think-tanks and such. BTW, I didn't >didn't take any economics class. My point is clear to those who took the time to read it. There is no argument; simply facts that you can choose to deal with or ignore. It has nothing to do with what I, or you, "want" to do. I am simply stating what all clear-thinking futurists can tell you: Namely, that human civilization will be drastically changed by the technological advances that will come about within the next 200 years, and we can either be flexible enough to adopt a new way of thinking, or die. Internet file sharing is only the beginning of much more drastic changes to come. Your debate about whether they are "right" or "wrong" is pointless. >Having said all this, it does occur to me "What does all our writing have >to do with Emailer in any significant way?" Maybe this should be >redirected to a philosophy e-list, since we have gone considerably >off-topic. The discussion of the merits/drawbacks of Internet-based software file sharing are EXTREMELY on-topic for a list which deals with a piece of Internet software, like Claris Emailer. Especially a piece of Internet software which has been End-Of-Lifed, and would not even be obtainable for new users if it were not for "illegal" file sharing. Sorry about those of you who don't like this discussion, but I believe it is just as relevant (if not more so) than all the talk on here about the benefits of Mac OS X and which word processor to use (things which truly have little to do with Emailer). This is an unmoderated board, so if you don't want to read a given topic, you can simply ignore it. ___________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe send a mail message with a SUBJECT line of "unsubscribe" to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
