Do zoomers know how to steal things?
#1
I'm not a moralist, but sometimes things unsaid become things forgotten. Here is the most basic way to steal things. You download a torrent client, I recommend qBittorrent Official Website. You go to a website to find the torrents. The two i use most often are 1377x | Download torrents | 1337x.to | 1377x.to and Browse :: Nyaa . If you are paranoid about your provider, you use a VPN. I like Private Internet Access | Anonymous VPN Service Provider its like 3 bucks a month and gives a wide variety of nations to spoof. The player that will work with most formats of stuff you download is VLC: Official site - Free multimedia solutions for all OS! - VideoLAN . All of these points are very debatable, but someone should put them down.

If you want to steal things relating to research or textbooks, you should look into libgen or irc. I haven't used IRC in over a decade, but it apparently remains the premier way to find textbooks.
#2
Those born after 2002-3 definitely don't. I've had to explain torrenting to some lad, he was spooked - but seeing he's a Brit and with all the autistically obsessed police hell-bent on fucking everyone over that isn't some sort of nigger that is, it's sort of understandable. Cowardly parents scaring their kids - meanwhile those who are based don't have them, yet.
#3
As far as I'm aware, it's a question of both convenience and conformity for them. They don't see their peers doing it, and why torrent when you can chuck a subscription at something and instantly have access to things with a prettier UI and recommendations, and all these other bells and whistles. It's not actually forbidden knowledge or them being too retarded to do so, or anything like that; most of them simply can't comprehend the reason to do what they see as going out of their way for something that is much more convenient for them through legitimate channels, outside of more fringe instances like looking up pirated anime streaming sites. I do believe "the old ways" are much more prevalent in non-Western countries, however, especially with more censorious regimes, and that would extend to zoomers.
#4
I feel like there's a really bad feedback loop at work where due to a lack of piracy and DIY culture people don't learn about as many new things, and the accessibility of curated works allows for taste to be rendered more and more narrow from above. On one hand they don't really know how. But it's not hard to learn. The real trouble is they don't know what they're missing out on. For me these things fed into each other. I was able to take little forays into weirder stuff because piracy made everything equally accessible, and from there I could develop tastes and interests to follow, which piracy enabled to virtually no end.

We're returning to the ghetto of curated trash culture with little to no potential to break out that tv threatened to seal us in forever. The internet saved us from Fahrenheit 451, but now the apps, services, and general fisher-priceification of the internet are setting us back on track.

Of course the piracy is still there, but it seems to be getting genuinely harder to fall into using the internet as we do every year if you're young. I get the impression that to people on the younger end of teenage and below now the internet isn't really even conceivable as this big and open exploratory and self-service thing. Instead it's a service you plug into, like tv. Only use like 15 big websites that are basically channels.
#5
There's still private trackers around so piracy is not entirely dead though I don't think they're kept alive by zoomers. One might want to look into this, it's an extensive list/guide on piracy (not just torrents), one can likely find something of interest.
#6
When you think about it, these people are more likely to actually steal physical things from a store (or at least sympathize with those who do) than to download illegitimate copies from the internet (not actually stealing).
#7
Sharing this here. Adjacent issue that strongly interests me. Sort of moderately successful genre author Scott Bakker sharing his thoughts on piracy. I think it's very up in the air whether or not piracy and piracy culture are actually good for media/art.

https://www.second-apocalypse.com/index....pic=2310.0


Quote:Actually consumers are spending less money--way less in some circumstances. Large musical acts are able to recoup income via concerts, but I have friends in the industry who've sacrificed health and relationships touring and touring endless dives, sometimes glad just to get paid in drinks because of the glut of bands out there. Otherwise, the marketers now utterly rule the mainstream music scene.

Even if your spiked versions of the data that consumers were paying the same were true, that would still count as an economic loss, a year over year loss compounded into a genuine disaster in a mere decade.

The only argument worse than this is the argument that IP is an oppressive and artificial cultural device. All economic norms are oppressive and artificial. Yars just pick and choose those that make them feel better, they way all free-riders do.

Otherwise, who said anything about putting the genie in back in the box? It's about creating a culture that maximizes the number of people who do pay, and dispelling the ridiculous argument that giving away free content actually increases the amount of money ALL artists receive. It may help certain artists in certain circumstances, the same way giving away Toyotas at hockey games helps sell Toyotas. It's proselytizing Yars like you, the ones who think returning to the age patronage is good, 'natural,' and that the vast explosion of professionalized creativity arising out of IP was 'unnatural,' 'oppressive,' bad--YOU are the virus, the one slowly ensuring every piece of content is selling something other than itself, via patronage obligations, or product placement, or the simple terror of doing anything different as a profession.

YOU WOULD NOT HAVE READ A SINGLE ONE OF MY BOOKS, were it not for this oppressive, unnatural system you're decrying.

A few years back my agent asked me to pull together some illegal download numbers for PoN to convince Overlook to lower their kindle price point. So I toured a wide number of sites--those possessing download counters. I stopped once I surpassed the number of books I had actually sold. And this actually helped my sales? Give me a fucking break buddy. Go peddle your self-serving bullshit to someone who doesn't have a family to feed, but wants to feel like they're sticking it to the man taking food out of the mouths of the people they claim to admire and adore. Steal if you want, but stop pretending you're doing good, let alone heeding destiny's call.
#8
Bakker is correct but it amounts to whining. Reading that made me realize how much of an optimist and a pragmatist I am compared to some people. As for feeding his family, he could take this as the market gently nudging him towards a trade that would actually help other people feed their families in a quid pro quo manner such as being an auto mechanic, electrician, or farmer. There is a subtle hypocrisy to suggesting that his readers and/or society look in the mirror and change their behavior so that he is compensated a greater amount while refusing to alter the way in which he contributes to civilization.

Civilization is collapsing due to incompetence and malice. Use your big brain to make as much money as possible and have as many high IQ children as possible. That's not trivial but there are easier ways to go about it than by trying to commoditize 1s and 0s. Put down the vinyls and novels and pick up Bitcoin Magazine and Fine Homebuilding. Surf the wave instead of getting swallowed by it.

why are you getting mad at libertarians for having some fallacious arguments against IP...there are legitimate negrophiles out there who you could be criticizing instead

you would be rich if you bought a small amount of bitcoin with your book money
#9
Torrenting ruined all media because now the only people who pay for anything are soys and women, if there's no economic intensive for keyed media there will be none. But right wingers are stingy as fuck and want to sit on a pile of gold in the middle of nowhere wearing their crusty old cargo shorts.
#10
(08-24-2022, 04:57 PM)Guest Wrote: Torrenting ruined all media because now the only people who pay for anything are soys and women, if there's no economic intensive for keyed media there will be none. But right wingers are stingy as fuck and want to sit on a pile of gold in the middle of nowhere wearing their crusty old cargo shorts.

People that are making media purely for economic reasons don't make the best media. There's plenty of not well known mangakas that make decent works despite not receiving money from most readers outside Japan, this is possible because the barrier of entry is lower. Torrenting was also relatively more popular a decade ago than it is now which would mean that 2010s shows were worse than now.
#11
(08-17-2022, 04:31 AM)anthony Wrote:
Quote:It's proselytizing Yars like you, the ones who think returning to the age patronage is good, 'natural,' and that the vast explosion of professionalized creativity arising out of IP was 'unnatural,' 'oppressive,' bad--YOU are the virus, the one slowly ensuring every piece of content is selling something other than itself, via patronage obligations, or product placement, or the simple terror of doing anything different as a profession.

Yes, bub, I'm positive that amazon and netflix wouldn't do any of that if nobody pirated their stuff.
The main reason why people do it is because of the extreme oversaturation of the market - the same mechanisms that allowed him to put his stuff out there also allowed thousands of others to do the same. The average consumer, in the face of overwhelming loss of quality of basically everything sold on the market (including non-digital ones) has no way to be certain whether it's worth the money or not; the 'conscious' consumer's way out is piracy. I know plenty of people who use piracy, but end up paying money for things they pirated that turned out to be worth it, I've done just that myself.

The entire quote sounds like a complaint, dressed in fancy words, that his work cannot defend itself on its own, that it requires outside enforcement to make money; it's supposedly the reader's fault he's not the next Tolkien and thus doesn't earn as much money as he would have wished. Obviously, monetary compensation is and always has been primary motivation for creators of any works of art, but he misses a couple of important points. First one is that a competent creator can create works of high art despite patronage; look at the old masters, whose only hope of earning their bread was painting Biblical scenes for the church and flattering portraits of nobility. Second one is that the aforementioned market conditions are out of the hands of both the author and the consumer. The author puts his livelihood on the line to release a story he considers good, but he has to compete with thousands of others in a genre than has seen its best works a long time ago and very rarely is able to move past regurgitating what has already been said several times. On the other hand, the customer is faced with a deluge of works of fiction and, as mentioned before, has to make a choice how to spend his limited amount of money based on publisher's blurb, amazon reviews and opinions of friends. That is not much. He might just not be as good as he would like.

https://twitter.com/joycecaroloates/stat...0389022723
And of course there's this. Keep in mind that only small part of the profit goes to the author himself.
#12
(08-18-2022, 08:29 PM)BillyONare Wrote: Bakker is correct but it amounts to whining. Reading that made me realize how much of an optimist and a pragmatist I am compared to some people. As for feeding his family, he could take this as the market gently nudging him towards a trade that would actually help other people feed their families in a quid pro quo manner such as being an auto mechanic, electrician, or farmer. There is a subtle hypocrisy to suggesting that his readers and/or society look in the mirror and change their behavior so that he is compensated a greater amount while refusing to alter the way in which he contributes to civilization.

Civilization is collapsing due to incompetence and malice. Use your big brain to make as much money as possible and have as many high IQ children as possible. That's not trivial but there are easier ways to go about it than by trying to commoditize 1s and 0s. Put down the vinyls and novels and pick up Bitcoin Magazine and Fine Homebuilding. Surf the wave instead of getting swallowed by it.

why are you getting mad at libertarians for having some fallacious arguments against IP...there are legitimate negrophiles out there who you could be criticizing instead

you would be rich if you bought a small amount of bitcoin with your book money

Bakker is a farmer, among other things. He came from a farming family and still does it a bit I think. Or has done at points. And I think the response on the other points is that like everyone Bakker is living as pleasing a life as he can balanced on his ability to bear burdens. Yes we could all become monomaniacal power-accumulators, but in the process we'd probably lose everything most of us consider the accumulation of this power to be for. What's the point in chasing raw power if in today's world that turns you into a spiritual peer of clans of pajeets and jews?

And accumulation of power is actually what his novels are about. You asked me what it was called once. Did you ever read Prince of Nothing? This has all likely occurred to him.

(08-24-2022, 04:57 PM)Guest Wrote: Torrenting ruined all media because now the only people who pay for anything are soys and women, if there's no economic intensive for keyed media there will be none. But right wingers are stingy as fuck and want to sit on a pile of gold in the middle of nowhere wearing their crusty old cargo shorts.

As Bakker says there's an element of this, but I think beyond him you'd have a hard time naming examples. Good western video games were destroyed by communist (spiritual and literal) infiltration, not piracy. Proof is in Japan. I really feel for artists getting bled on this stuff but this didn't ruin media. There is a massive economic incentive for keyed media. It's cool and sells. How many companies have to scream "FAGGOTRY HU AKBAR" before slitting their own throats over the rainbow altar before people stop blaming market forces for our gay age of truth-hating vomit-art?

Japan does not play the spiritual communism toll because it's the last real and insulated culture against this, and so it culturally punches insanely above its weight and wins the money and attention of the entire planet. Despite piracy on top of that.

(08-25-2022, 03:05 AM)Guest Wrote: He might just not be as good as he would like.

His other big post may be relevant to everything you've said. I've cropped your post down to a sentence for size, not because the rest is irrelevant.

Quote:The sheer number of media consumers worldwide is exploding, so of course there's an overall gain. In Western music markets, revenue remains around 60% of its 2000 mark. Even looking at the EU data correlating higher illegal downloading with higher purchasing you very quickly run into differential granularity problems: the fact is, the 'long tail' as they call it, is getting skinnier and skinnier, and the long tail is where the genuine novelty incubates. The skinnier it gets, the less incubation time it has, the more likely it is to die off, the more monotonous and mechanical the mainstream becomes. (Since concert/touring income is almost entirely restricted to the manufacturers of pap, and only applicable to musicians to boot, it is an argumentative canard).

Like all instances of free-riding, the viability depends on honest brokers. Since you seem to recognize this now (abandoning the assertion that IP is an artificial instrument of oppression), then the question is one of why you aren't decrying illegal downloading? At what point do you think illegal downloading will negatively impact sales. When it reaches 50%? 60%? 70%? 80%? Do you only plan to defend it so far?

To the extent you provide apparently articulate rationales for illegal downloading you are, most definitely, part of the problem. I thank you for buying my books, but as someone who regularly encounters 'I'll keep reading, but I ain't paying a cent,' comments because of some perceived moral failing on my part, I would kindly ask that you stop encouraging people to perpetuate my poverty. Do you really think product placement and merchandising are commensurate with projects like mine? What other 'business model' do you have in mind? Government handouts? The last I checked my books contravened pretty much every 'literary scruple' an arts bureaucrat can be expected to muster.

I am genuinely 'out there.' The only way fools like me get to make a difference is by toughing it out in the long tail. The problem I face, even though my sell-through percentages are in the high 80 percentile range, is that publishers are becoming less and less inclined to 'develop' midlist authors, and more and more inclined to grope for lightning in a bottle. Why pay an artist to hone their craft when you need only troll for magical amateurs? The less books I sell, the more expendable I become. As soon as I vanish from bookstore shelves, my single biggest point of exposure to new readers vanishes also, as well as any chance of receiving mainstream attention. Then odds are, it's off to the experimenter's graveyard. The genre community finds me pretentious, too 'academic.' The academic community finds me vulgar, too 'genre.' My publishers are the only institutional leg I have to stand on... of course I find your chiseling insulting. That which robs me makes me richer.

In one breath you say illegal downloading generates IP income, and in the next you say it's time to find something other than IP income. Then you say I'm advocating higher levels of household debt. Ooof. If we don't let people steal X, then we risk the economy collapsing. And X = 'content' as opposed to 'chairs' or 'diapers' or 'allergy medication' why?

Talk about rationalization.

Thread is here by the way: https://www.second-apocalypse.com/index....pic=2310.0
#13
(08-25-2022, 03:05 AM)Guest Wrote: The main reason why people do it is because of the extreme oversaturation of the market - the same mechanisms that allowed him to put his stuff out there also allowed thousands of others to do the same. The average consumer, in the face of overwhelming loss of quality of basically everything sold on the market (including non-digital ones) has no way to be certain whether it's worth the money or not; the 'conscious' consumer's way out is piracy. I know plenty of people who use piracy, but end up paying money for things they pirated that turned out to be worth it, I've done just that myself.

I do this as well, mostly with video games. Seems necessary since many of the games I enjoy playing (grand strategy stuff like Civ, Paradox Games, Total War) are basically released as unfinished products that developers then milk for even more money through DLCs. As another Guest said (maybe you), "People that are making media purely for economic reasons don't make the best media." Of course the greatest artists relied on funding and patronage in order to see their works through, but the money making process was never the sole purpose of doing the work. The greatest artists have always seen the creation of their work as the real end of what they're doing. 

As to the whole discussion of wanting 'keyed media,' I'll be honest and say that most overtly KEYED entertainment is usually pretty bad. No different than overtly KEYED media. The use of heavy-handed polemics within a work of art sticks out like a sore-thumb, and exists to the detriment of the work of art. Insofar as great works of art are based, it's usually something more subtle. Celine doesn't come out and say that he hates niggers and kikes in Journey, but it's a great work, his best novel, and all of the stuff that will be expressed in his essays is in there, you just have to know how to read. Of course, some heavy-handed works that are still great works of art exist, Dostoyevsky is a great example. But he's an exception to the rule, and Netflix or HBO will never be staffed with writers of that skill. I don't think torrenting has in any way led to a lack of KEYED media being released, and if the Anti-Torrenting-Guest really believes this he should come with a better argument and some evidence.
#14
"The sheer number of media consumers worldwide is exploding"

Yeah all those subsaharans are just as likely to read Bakker novels.

"In Western music markets, revenue remains around 60% of its 2000 mark"

So does the number of civilized white people. The forensics are weak. Music is trash now anyway. I rarely listen to music.

He seems to be very confused. It's 2017 and he is arguing with millenilol libertarians about torrenting. The third world is pouring in, IQs are dropping rapidly, risking the extinction of the human race. Cancel culture is at an all-time-high and every white male with red blood is terrified of being cancelled or subjected to false rape accusations. White people are not having enough unprotected sex. The death of Heather Heyer was faked. 2017, not 2010.

The reason he is poor is because taxes are too high so he can only keep about half of his earnings and his potential customers only have one third of their discretionary spending. And this doesn't even go into second order and chilling effects. The reason he and similar midlist authors don't get published is because he is a talented heterosexual white male and all the book stores and publishing houses are controlled by SJWs. I believe you when you say his books are great. Any sane book store and publisher would keep his books on the shelves even if they didn't sell optimally. "something something lightning in a bottle statistics" fails Occam's Razor.

Counterpoint: icycalm "deserves", if we are to speak of such nebulous things, to be 1000x as wealthy as any novelist, not because he is more power-hungry but simply because his books bring far more beauty, clarity, and joy to his readers. His paywalled writings are almost impossible to pirate and he is still poor.



[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)