U
usdn rep
New member
jpw23 said:
haha........you cant debate cause you mind cant stretch and comprehend.....Your a lemming
- Status
haha........you cant debate cause you mind cant stretch and comprehend.....Your a lemming
U
usdn rep
New member
noisewreck said:
See that is not my point.....My point is why do people take the "law" (man made) as they morals over their own personal expriences.......???? People were sayin" a thief is a thief, steealing is wrong"....blah blah blah......I brought up the Katrina thing, now the situation is changin......."well it's okay when this happens" or "99.9 percent of them were stealing TV's".....Basically confirming what I orignially was sayin, stealin has more to do wit needs and if some one steals, it's not a moral call depending on the situation........But they twisted my point for their convienice.........Thats why everybody is mad.......
How does someone "lack" morals if they steal a software program......?? You dont know the whole situation, they coulda took one program, but bought everything else..........So they now lack morals???? I'm glad somebody else here is open minded enough to see what I speak and ask questions..........This is how adults convo......take notes folks
noisewreck
New member
Well, here's the thing. The issue of morality is that it's hard to define. People can argue till they're blue in the face about what's moral and what's not, and not come to a consensus. This is because there are no set standards of "morals", they change depending on culture, upbringing, beliefes (or lack thereof), so morality or immorality are really not a good basis for "shoulds" and "should nots". Plus, if we go by morality then unless a person is someone like Ghandi, then they're pretty much immoral in one respect or another, and if one denies that then that person is a hipocrite.
Is it "moral" to have more than one wife? It depends. Is it "moral" to kill and then eat someone? Well, there are still tribes on earth that practice cannibalism, in fact it is a sacred ritual for some of them. This may be abhorrent from the western "civilized" point of view, but for those tribes it's what their "god" wants them to do. (BTW it's funny how many people do some really fucked up shit just because "God" told them it was a good idea, just look at Al Qaeda and our... uh... beloved President).
Back to the subject of software piracy. Instead of "law", "morals" and all that nonsense, I think it would be more productive or perhaps more constructive to look at the issue of software piracy from the point of view of ethics, as it is much easier to define ethical standards.
A good way to define ethics is as a set of principles of right conduct. The question then becomes "what is right conduct"? A broad stroke way of looking at it would be that right conduct is one that makes social interaction easy for everyone involved, which creates an environment of trust and shared responsibility. One can also define ethics in business dealings and professional life. For example, I've been in the IT business for the past 11-12 years, most of which as systems and network administrator. This gives me immense powers and access to company data. Every IT professional at mid to high level possitions has access to all or at least most of the company data, confidential and otherwise. This means that if someone in that position wants to read a CEO's e-mail, they can. If they want to see all the payroll, they can. If they want to look at some design documents, they can. However, it is part of the ethical code (unwritten) of any IT professional, to refrain from such transgressions, unless instructed by someone in charge, and who has a good reason to do so. Without this, no company can trust their IT professionals, which would cripple the whole structure. There needs to be a level of trust.
Now, when someone develops code for a program, say a commersial soft synth, they have to be able to have the trust that they will receive just compensation for their efforts, as this is how they support themselves, their family, and business. If they don't, then it's both demoralising in a sense that it makes them feel that their efforts aren't appreciated, and jeopardises the company's well being, which can lead to bankruptcy, which means there will be no further development for a certain product. For example, i'd hate to see Native Instruments go out of business, because I really enjoy their products, and rely on them rather heavily (at least Absynth and Reaktor). When a company goes out of business, it hurts not only them, but also everyone else who relies on their product. So, overall, it is in the best interests of the general public to support those businesses. It is a case of shared responsibility, and building trust.
Is it "moral" to have more than one wife? It depends. Is it "moral" to kill and then eat someone? Well, there are still tribes on earth that practice cannibalism, in fact it is a sacred ritual for some of them. This may be abhorrent from the western "civilized" point of view, but for those tribes it's what their "god" wants them to do. (BTW it's funny how many people do some really fucked up shit just because "God" told them it was a good idea, just look at Al Qaeda and our... uh... beloved President).
Back to the subject of software piracy. Instead of "law", "morals" and all that nonsense, I think it would be more productive or perhaps more constructive to look at the issue of software piracy from the point of view of ethics, as it is much easier to define ethical standards.
A good way to define ethics is as a set of principles of right conduct. The question then becomes "what is right conduct"? A broad stroke way of looking at it would be that right conduct is one that makes social interaction easy for everyone involved, which creates an environment of trust and shared responsibility. One can also define ethics in business dealings and professional life. For example, I've been in the IT business for the past 11-12 years, most of which as systems and network administrator. This gives me immense powers and access to company data. Every IT professional at mid to high level possitions has access to all or at least most of the company data, confidential and otherwise. This means that if someone in that position wants to read a CEO's e-mail, they can. If they want to see all the payroll, they can. If they want to look at some design documents, they can. However, it is part of the ethical code (unwritten) of any IT professional, to refrain from such transgressions, unless instructed by someone in charge, and who has a good reason to do so. Without this, no company can trust their IT professionals, which would cripple the whole structure. There needs to be a level of trust.
Now, when someone develops code for a program, say a commersial soft synth, they have to be able to have the trust that they will receive just compensation for their efforts, as this is how they support themselves, their family, and business. If they don't, then it's both demoralising in a sense that it makes them feel that their efforts aren't appreciated, and jeopardises the company's well being, which can lead to bankruptcy, which means there will be no further development for a certain product. For example, i'd hate to see Native Instruments go out of business, because I really enjoy their products, and rely on them rather heavily (at least Absynth and Reaktor). When a company goes out of business, it hurts not only them, but also everyone else who relies on their product. So, overall, it is in the best interests of the general public to support those businesses. It is a case of shared responsibility, and building trust.
S
seryozha
New member
usdn rep said:
Ad Hominem
S
seryozha
New member
jpw23 said:
Ad Hominem
Bass Master "K"
New member
Werewolf10 said:
Oh oh, guys...two people with a combined post count of 17 don't want us to talk about piracy. Oh man....well we'd better just close this one up.
Oh wait, I have a better idea....IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ THIS THREAD THEN DON'T F'ING OPEN IT UP!
Do you not realise how stupid you look posting on a thread that you want to close? Don't read it if you don't like it.
Bass Master "K"
New member
noisewreck said:
Tell it like it is brother. I'm still waiting for a story of someone who couldn't SURVIVE without their stolen version of Cubase. Strange how I keep bringing that up since survival has been brought up as the excuse that makes stealing okay, yet usdn can't give an example. Hmmmmmm.....
jpw23
New member
Bass Master "K" said:
Well....there I was, stranded in the middle of swamp, no boat, no cars, not a single luxury, starving to death, cell phone battery was spent, and all I had was my laptop and cubase.....thank God for cubase! It replaces food, shelter, clothing, water and also makes a damn fine companion on those lonley nights!
The downside is that the stolen version does not work as well.....glad I paid for it!!
F
frankieballsss
New member
usdn rep said:
You are so fucking stupid, I feel bad for letting my eyes read this shit. Not to mention your audacity beyond belief. You type like a 14 year old warcraft nerd, don't ever compare your piss poor writing to that of an adults.
S
seryozha
New member
frankieballsss said:
Ad Hominem
F
frankieballsss
New member
seryozha said:
Why should I even bother with his argument? It's already been proven wrong 375 different ways.
S
seryozha
New member
frankieballsss said:
Petitio Principii
F
frankieballsss
New member
seryozha said:
You lost me there bub.
warrengtype
New member
circular logic
frankieballsss said:
fraserhutch
Flypaper for freaks
Which is NOT the same thing as a statement of a logical conclusion.seryozha said:
Give it a rest, dude.
S
seryozha
New member
fraserhutch said:
Petitio Principii - A fallacy of presemuption where the conclusion of the argument is not stated but lies within one of the premises.
fraserhutch said:
Why?
U
usdn rep
New member
frankieballsss said:
Okay....another lame ass way of sayin you cannot debate my logic........If you cannot debate it, dont hate it......
U
usdn rep
New member
frankieballsss said:
You dont bother because you cant......Nobbody proved my wrong........HOW CAN YOU "LACK" MORALS???? Prove that wrong dumbass.........If you steal, that more or less is an issue of needs not so much of "morals"........What about "stealin is stealing and shows a lack of morals " argument....I brought up the Katrina case, and people caught a case of the "well thats different"-itis.....Bottomline you cannot debate my logic because you lack the intelligence and expirence to do so.........I basically step on your whole reality, that followin the law because you cannot think for your self is "lame"..........
W
Werewolf10
New member
Bass Master "K" said:
ouch ,,, I did'nt really mean it like that. I did like to read about this topic, but after 30 + pages it seems pretty obvious that your not changing anyone's mind. Hence the stfu... I will rephrase " please guys your wasting your time" is that better?
F
frankieballsss
New member
usdn rep said:
Thanks for giving me a bottom line. If you are trying to call me stupid, at least spell your words right.
Morality can be introduced as a subjective issue, but in this context, it isn't. Morality in this context is a code of conduct ruled by rationality. Unfortunately for yourself, you lack rationality.
- Status