This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Repairman goes to your house, fixes your sink, fixes your toilet, fixes your....

#311Tyranius2(Topic Creator)Posted 3/25/2014 12:17:09 PM
Worknofun370 posted...
chandl34 posted...
All of these products (cars, books, digital games) have a research/design period, and a production/distribution period. All the designers are already paid during the research/design period, the investors recover their loses during the production/distribution period and decide whether to produce another product. Aside from the differing cost of production/distribution and ease of reproduction, what else is different?


The biggest, and most commonly sighted issue with the analogy is one has a lost good, the other does not.

That is a pretty gigantic difference really. Now, don't get me wrong.... I'm not trying to defend piracy or anything along those lines by making that statement, it's just a truth. In any analogy that has to do with stealing a good, that original good is lost and a new one needs to be produced to replace it. That's not the case with piracy, and that's where that analogy always has failed, doesn't matter if it's a book or a car.


There's the potential loss of a sale at least. People can argue that they wouldn't have paid anyway all day long, doesn't change the fact that human nature and common sense makes this argument walk on thin thread.
---
http://myanimelist.net/mangalist/Tyranius
#312Ch3wyPosted 3/25/2014 12:21:29 PM
Tyranius2 posted...
Depends on the product. I mostly don't.


So it's arbitrary huh?

No, reason is used.



You attempted to invalidate the analogy. You never attempted to make me understand how "I wouldn't have paid anyway" is a good enough reason to take products without paying. IF your reasoning is because you never explicitly told the company that you were gonna shaft them, that's not a legitimate reason, just because they don't know YOU specifically is taking their stuff without paying doesn't make it alright.

I did, previously. Sorry you weren't able to see it but as I said it's clearly futile at this point so no further attempts will be made.

And please, stop putting words in my mouth.


Once again missing the point. Attacking the analogy instead of arguing about the matter at hand. Why is it alright to take stuff because you claim that you wouldn't have paid anyway?


You were using an analogy as your argument. Of course I'm going to attack the analogy, because you are arguing from analogy.

You're basically asking me to attack your argument but disregard that it's an invalid argument. That's illogical and I will not partake in that kind of tomfoolery.
---
How the hell can a octopus live outside of water anyways? This is so stupid. -Fade2black001
#313r0ge00Posted 3/25/2014 12:25:47 PM
Tyranius2 posted...
There's the potential loss of a sale at least.


There's also the potential gain of a sale/sales. No one has numbers to back up lost sales or gained sales, so it's pointless to argue it.
#314runromPosted 3/25/2014 12:31:32 PM
Can someone give a tldr version?
---
MBP 2009 | i5 3570k @ 4.4ghz | AMD 7870 | PS Vita | Nintendo 3DS | HP Touchpad
Now part of the 500 posts club.
#315Worknofun370Posted 3/25/2014 12:36:31 PM(edited)
runrom posted...
Can someone give a tldr version?


Piracy
Analogy
Analogy
Piracy
Religion
Analogy
Grammar
Parental Coddling
Being a productive member of society
Analogy
#316chandl34Posted 3/25/2014 12:36:32 PM
This is a thread about making bad analogies.
---
... even on Earth Mode.
#317Tyranius2(Topic Creator)Posted 3/25/2014 12:42:06 PM
No, reason is used.


No, pretty sure you're just okay with taking without paying when it feels convenient, like with piracy. Be aware that I'm not talking about damage done to a company, I'm talking about the criminal being a scumbag and taking things without paying.

A person who refuses to pay for a game on grounds of "wouldn't have paid anyway" has the same mindset of someone who would refuse to pay a repairman after his job is done. You either think the person is good in both cases or scum in both cases. You can't say one the guy is alright and the other the guy is a demon.


I did, previously. Sorry you weren't able to see it but as I said it's clearly futile at this point so no further attempts will be made.


Well, you ran in circles and in the end didn't make a point. People who agree with me still don't know any legitimate reason why "wouldn't have paid anyway" is grounds for refusing payment for taking something you don't own.


You were using an analogy as your argument. Of course I'm going to attack the analogy, because you are arguing from analogy.


No, I used the analogy to start the topic and get everyone thinking "is it really alright to take something that costs money and not pay for it, just because I think I wouldn't have paid the price anyway?"

And then I was going to argue against people with arguably legitimate reasons why this practice is justified. Instead people attacked the analogy and not the idea behind it.


There's also the potential gain of a sale/sales.


That's not relevant. The guy said nothing was lost with piracy, and I presented something that actually is lost.
---
http://myanimelist.net/mangalist/Tyranius
#318runromPosted 3/25/2014 12:46:01 PM
I'm just gonna leave things at this:
Piracy devalues one's work. It cheapens the effort, time, and resources spent by someone to create something and yet, people still want that product.
I remember when people showed their disapproval or approval of a product by simply buying or not buying it. Nowadays, you have people who still want a product without going through the trouble of actually paying.
---
MBP 2009 | i5 3570k @ 4.4ghz | AMD 7870 | PS Vita | Nintendo 3DS | HP Touchpad
Now part of the 500 posts club.
#319Worknofun370Posted 3/25/2014 12:47:16 PM
Tyranius2 posted...
That's not relevant. The guy said nothing was lost with piracy, and I presented something that actually is lost.


No, I did not say that. I said that when comparing a stolen good to piracy that there is a loss good in one and not the other. That's accurate.

I never said nothing was lost with piracy.
#320Ch3wyPosted 3/25/2014 12:47:53 PM
Tyranius2 posted...


No, pretty sure you're just okay with taking without paying when it feels convenient, like with piracy. Be aware that I'm not talking about damage done to a company, I'm talking about the criminal being a scumbag and taking things without paying.

Incorrect.


A person who refuses to pay for a game on grounds of "wouldn't have paid anyway" has the same mindset of someone who would refuse to pay a repairman after his job is done.

Also incorrect. As has been explained previously.


Well, you ran in circles and in the end didn't make a point. People who agree with me still don't know any legitimate reason why "wouldn't have paid anyway" is grounds for refusing payment for taking something you don't own.

Actually people have explained their reasoning to you several times.


No, I used the analogy to start the topic and get everyone thinking "is it really alright to take something that costs money and not pay for it, just because I think I wouldn't have paid the price anyway?"

And then I was going to argue against people with arguably legitimate reasons why this practice is justified. Instead people attacked the analogy and not the idea behind it.

Your idea was based on an analogy that didn't work. Your idea is completely supported by your bad analogy. Your argument is bad, period.

If you have any other reasoning you're going to need to present it, but you've just been backing yourself up with poor analogy.
---
How the hell can a octopus live outside of water anyways? This is so stupid. -Fade2black001