richmondez

Now all restaurants are taco bell.

Why have content on the web at all if it can’t be viewed by anyone? Even if generated with an intention to generate profit, there is no opportunity to do so if no one is looking at it.

And if everyone blocked ads and couldn’t see sites that insisted on advertising, how would that work out for the websites?

If you are going to worry about archival then when reencode it at all? Just remux the content from the dvd into a suitable container and be done with it.

The whole idea of copyright is a granting a state backed monopoly which is the antithesis of a free market as I understand it.

Rocky now is what Centos used to be, a downstream rebuild of Redhat Enterprise. Cento Stream is now a rolling release and is pretty much RHEL unstable.

If you want to accomplish a noble cause like preservation I don’t think it’s disingenuous to also satisfy some personal desires along the way. Easier to get people on board to do it if you do.

Downloading has never been stealing to be fair, that has always been emotive framing for copyright supporting propaganda.

People can run a self hosted search engine/indexer with bitmagnet, how are they going to be taken down?

I felt the /s was implied but clearly enough people actually believe that linux is only for people who master arcane command lines that it could be taken as a genuine belief.

Finally linux will have parity in useability with windows.

Doesn’t Anna’s Archive mirror libgen amongst other things?

Maximising their return on investment presumably figuring that the increased fee will bring in more money despite some customers cancelling.

You are right my argument was predicated on the price rise being justified by piracy not the cause of it. If they don’t like ESPNs pricing model can’t they license their content elsewhere?

Yeah, that isn’t how economics work, they increased the price because they believe it will be a more profitable price point. I guess they could argue they lost the price sensitive customers to piracy and are just giving up on that segment and focusing on the people who just pay whatever?

Tell that to console manufacturers. Or Apple for that matter.

Technicality of usage rights is very relevant, framing as a purchase where it actually isn’t is dishonest and the fact that they make more money being dishonest doesn’t make it right. Other than that you used an awful lot of words to basically agree with me.

No, no ownership is being conferred except to a number, the supporters club key let’s call it. That is what you are buying, it’s like an NFT. And just like NFTs it’s being marketed as though you are purchasing the work itself which you absolutely are not doing. You are paying for the right to say you paid.

If you don’t pay you are in exactly the same state as if you paid regarding your license to use the software, it’s licensed to you under the terms of the agplv3. If they were selling a support contract that would be fine too, but again, no, you get no extra support over what anyone posting a issue on the tracker will get. Even if it were a support contract then it should be made clear that is what you buy.

Buying confers ownership of something even if it’s just a legal agreement like a software license. No ownership over immich is being conferred, nothing is being conveyed to anyone so it’s incorrect to term it a purchase, much less a purchase of immich.

None of those things are true. Paying money is in no way guaranteeing the current developers will wake up wanting to maintain it tomorrow, nor am I purchasing access to an update service. It isn’t a purchase of anything and shouldn’t be framed as one. It’s a Contribution or a donation that gives nothing in return and saying it’s something else is dishonest.