Well, my friend, he’s kinda poor he can’t afford some books and some streaming services, so he pirates. He pirate books, audiobook and videos and other stuff. Sometimes he buys books he likes a lot out of loyalty to the author (yeah, I don’t understand it either), he likes to read physical books, but yeah, if he hates the author or just wants to skim through it, he will download the book.

He usually doesn’t like to pirate from small companies or professors who are trying to make a living by selling books, but from millionaires & plenty of mega corps which already have loads of money, he feels like it’s the right move to pirate

Also, have you ever noticed that you have felt that the value of a product has decreased just because you didn’t pay for it, thus you are less interested to read it? i.e., had you paid for the book, you would have more likely read that book.

He says he will buy stuff when his time is more valuable than money, let’s all hope that day is soon.

What are your piracy habits?

  • TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If we had any sense as a species we would be funding artists so that they can pursue their art full time. Industry advances technology, but art advances the mind.

    • Hanabie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We might end up like people who do graphics… replaced by AI tools. There aren’t any that make it as easy yet (and maybe there won’t), but who knows where tech will lead us.

      If you do it as a hobby, you don’t need to worry about it so much, but it does take something away for sure.

      • TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        AI will change the game, but I think after an initial period of growing pains that we’re really facing a shift in the economy whether we’re ready or not. All of the “problems” of capitalism have been due to runaway efficiency. A scarcity economy is absurd when we’re infinitely capable of producing everything people want or need.

        • Hanabie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree, and the optimist in me desperately wants to experience a post-scarcity society like the one we’re seeing in the The Culture books, where AIs run the world, and we humans are free to chase whatever it is we’re dreaming of.

          Maybe that’s a romantic notion, but I’m hesitant to give up on in. Dreams are what’s kept us going for the past millennia.

          • Zippy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You might become bored and depression does seem to be more common when you do not have a particular sense of purpose.

            I like the idea as well but human psychology might not be so conductive to easy living.

            • Hanabie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              What do you mean when you say we need a purpose?

              We are biologically designed to reproduce. So our current purpose is to survive until we’re grown to sexual maturity, reproduce, then raise our offspring to a stage where they’re able to survive on their own. Then, we either do it again, if we’re still young enough, or die and make room for the next generation. That seems like a very depressing purpose to me, but this is how evolution works.

              I think that we now have the intellectual capacity to transcendent this cycle. We’ve been for a while, and we formed societies, developed technology. Our first models were small tribes, very much hippie-like little communities, that suffered from attrition by tribe warfare and rule of the strongest, where reproduction was controlled by “the fittest”. Then we developed monarchic systems that provided a much more stable life for everyone, but ran on servitude (slavery) of peasants. We experimented with systems like communism, that then lead to terror by the ruling class (can still see that in China today), and landed on a somewhat democracy-adjacent system of capitalism that we’re running today, and that’s not sustainable, because we’re destroying our planet.

              What’s next, and what purpose for the individual do you have in mind?

              • Zippy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You don’t need a purpose and in fact most of the purpose people identify with are rather unnecessary for lack of better word. But people without some feeling of purpose are definately more prone to depression. Countries like Mexico should be less happy being people have far less wealth and have to work harder but the opposite it true. I find people are overall more happy and content. Now I would normal discount my experiences as being limited but if you look at the suicide rate of say the US to Mexico, the US has 4 times the rate.

                This is actually true for nearly every developed to developing nations and I think speaks a great deal about human nature.

                • Hanabie@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  purpose

                  Okay, so what you’re saying is that you think friction creates a sense of purpose. That might be true. People in Mexico are probably more happy about little things and enjoy them more, because that’s what they have. Less freedom of choice paradox to contend with, and less free time to sink into depression (I believe in “the olden times”, people were just too tired from fighting to survive to sit down and have an existential crisis). That sounds like a valid idea and is supporting your point.

                  The question is, how can we combine my (borrowed from the Culture series) idea of a post scarcity society with your idea of a psychological need for friction? Do you think it’s impossible to simulate the same feeling of need for something to result in the same strain that then causes happiness?

                  • Zippy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    First I will say the culture series is one of favorite books. But I would start by suggesting a post scarcity society would be difficult in the limited size of our solar system. The main reason being resource theory. Like animals with unlimited food, they will grow in population untill there no longer excess food. Humans likely would do the same until there again is a limit of resources and things develop value. Ie. There is a limit of ocean front property thus we will make a reason to toil to better ourselves and get the best view.

                    But that diverges somewhat from the question you ask. Could we be happy in such a society if it could exsist? If we bring up the culture series, nearly every character in those books have purpose. Actually great purpose in that often they are doing some deed to better humanity. So it is hard to really use that as an example. So the question then becomes could a regular person be fully happy be having all their needs met and not having to do anything? I rather think of the hedonism bot in Futurama. He does nothing all day but all his needs are met. He has to expend zero energy. To me that seems quite depressing. I would rather be doing something to better myself and overall other people but in a post scarcity society there is nothing physically anyone would need thus there would be little I can contribute. Now could there be a true post scarcity society? I suggest not While money should not exsist, there will still be currency. That will be in the form of fame or talent or power. Creative people will be in demand and trade that for favors. Actors same in that they will gain favor. People in power will use their influence to have access to interests that others may not. But these people would be the minority. The majority of people always will be your average Joe. Will they be happy just comfortable exsisting? Honestly I really don’t know. Maybe we can evolve to that.

                    I will bring up one other point. In the history of humanity, during times of great difficulties are also the times when humans evolved the fastest. Could the opposite occur? If we have all our physical need met, might our overall intelligence decrease. I suspect it might. Then again, might it be better to be dumb and happy than intelligent and depressed?

            • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You mean, being forced to find your own meaning instead of just going down a socially acceptable to-do list?

              Boredom is simply a lack of imagination and drugs.