I don’t need “grounds” for ad blocking, and neither do you. My property rights say that I’m entitled to modify the computation my system is doing as I see fit.
I swear I will just stick with paperback books for all entertainment if they continue to further infect my current forms of entertainment. Lets seem them try to insert an unskippable ad into a paperback book.
We already have ad books. They’re called magazines, just give it a couple more years and regular books will be filled with ads too. I’ve already encountered some regular books that have an insert talking about another book from the same creator. Sure it doesn’t seem bad now but soon it’ll be an insert about a friend of the creator, then about the same company that did this book, then in similar genres, then more inserts about products that might make your book reading experience better, etc etc.
I’ve already encountered some regular books that have an insert talking about another book from the same creator.
Oh, those? We call those reading snacks. You just rip them out and dip them in a blend of extra virgin olive oil and nicely reduced balsamic vinaigrette. Perfect pairing with a nice drama or thriller.
I will stick to emulating 30 year old video game consoles and fan reimplementations like OpenMW and OpenRCT2.
I am driven by pure spite. They will never get me!
Property rights are those rights, and we already have them. The issue is that the copyright cartel is trying to take them away from us. They are colonizing our devices with DRM + the DMCA anti-circumvention clause in an attempt to reduce us to techno-serfdom.
Ad-blocking, Free Software, Right to Repair (also a right we already have, not a new one we need), “you will own nothing and be happy” propaganda , etc. are all just different aspects of the same issue: the corporate war against property rights.
To be clear, property rights don’t come from laws; they are natural rights. “Property” as a concept stems from the fact that when Caveman Oog gets himself a neat tool-shaped rock and is holding it in his hand, nobody else can use it because he’s the one who has it, and the only way they could use it is for him to not have it anymore. He controls it and its use is exclusive to him. The rock is his property. The law doesn’t create that concept; it only codifies it so that the rock can remain Oog’s when he sets it down, instead of him having to guard it all day.
“Corporate” “property” “rights” are a whole different thing:
Contrary to the Dred Scott-level bullshit the SCOTUS excreted in Citizens United, corporations are not people and don’t even have an inherent right to exist, let alone any other rights. A person (i.e. a sole proprietor) has rights. People associating with each other (i.e. a full-liability general partnership) have rights. A group granted the privileges of limited liability and taxation as a separate entity via incorporation exists at the pleasure of the State, and the State has every right to impose conditions on that existence in exchange for granting the privilege.
Copyright is not “property.” A copyrighted work is an expression of an idea, and ideas are as near to opposite of property as it is possible to be. Not only does an idea stand in stark contrast to Oog’s rock in that it can be freely shared to the other cavemen without Oog losing possession of it, the value of it comes from the act of sharing. A creative work that never leaves the creator’s head is worthless, while a work shared with the whole world is incredibly valuable. (Don’t take my word for it, though: Thomas Jefferson – the guy who wrote or helped write the Copyright Clause, BTW – made a similar point, more eloquently explained.)
Copyright isn’t a “right” either. It, like incorporation, is a privilege granted by the State (or more specifically, Congress, but Federalism is beside the point). It does not exist because the creator of a work is somehow entitled to it, or even because the People wish to reward creators for their work. Copyright exists for the sole and express purpose “to promote the progress of science and the useful arts” – in other words, to enrich the Public Domain. The mechanism of copyright, granting a temporary monopoly in order to encourage the creation of more works than would otherwise exist, is nothing more than a means to an end. The goal of copyright is for it to expire!
Anyway, point is, I’m kinda already making that distinction between basic human dignity (natural rights) and artificial laws (copyright). The situation we find ourselves in today, where actual property rights of actual people are being subordinated to IntellectualImaginary Property “rights” of imaginary “people” is some pants-on-head stupid, ass-backwards, Bizarro-world bullshit!
Not just for security, selling snake oil is also grounds for ad blocking.
I don’t need “grounds” for ad blocking, and neither do you. My property rights say that I’m entitled to modify the computation my system is doing as I see fit.
We shoud have a right to not have commercials shoved down our eye and ear holes. If they could, they would force it down our throats and noses too.
Throats are still safe (for now?), but hate to break it to you about noses: https://dennisfoodservice.com/the-smells-that-make-customers-spend-more/
(Warning: has an autoplaying video at the very bottom).
I swear I will just stick with paperback books for all entertainment if they continue to further infect my current forms of entertainment. Lets seem them try to insert an unskippable ad into a paperback book.
“Please watch the ad on the included smart book accessory device to dispense the solvent that will un-glue the next 10 pages”
Relevant Simpsons Joke:
You have discovered the thing that may finally radicalize me.
We already have ad books. They’re called magazines, just give it a couple more years and regular books will be filled with ads too. I’ve already encountered some regular books that have an insert talking about another book from the same creator. Sure it doesn’t seem bad now but soon it’ll be an insert about a friend of the creator, then about the same company that did this book, then in similar genres, then more inserts about products that might make your book reading experience better, etc etc.
Oh, those? We call those reading snacks. You just rip them out and dip them in a blend of extra virgin olive oil and nicely reduced balsamic vinaigrette. Perfect pairing with a nice drama or thriller.
Any book that gets a movie or TV show seems to replace the original cover with an ad for the movie/TV show
You probably bought that book based on a paid review.
I will stick to emulating 30 year old video game consoles and fan reimplementations like OpenMW and OpenRCT2. I am driven by pure spite. They will never get me!
Yeah. It’s wild to me that the idiots making these enshitification decisions don’t understand this.
I could retreat into my existing installed Steam library for decades, to avoid their crap, if necessary.
And my retro game catalog dwarfs my modern game catalog, since I’ve been collecting those games longer and some of them are devilishly hard to master.
The Magmoor Bomb Jump energy tank in the original version of Metroid Prime wants to say hello.
They understand perfectly. Enough people don’t share our attitude and so this kind of behaviour is still profitable for them!
Property rights are those rights, and we already have them. The issue is that the copyright cartel is trying to take them away from us. They are colonizing our devices with DRM + the DMCA anti-circumvention clause in an attempt to reduce us to techno-serfdom.
Ad-blocking, Free Software, Right to Repair (also a right we already have, not a new one we need), “you will own nothing
and be happy” propaganda , etc. are all just different aspects of the same issue: the corporate war against property rights.Perfume salesmen have entered the chat
I’m pretty sure the corporate property rights say you’re not allowed tho.
so maybe laws are fucking stupid and you do it because if basic human dignity or something?
To be clear, property rights don’t come from laws; they are natural rights. “Property” as a concept stems from the fact that when Caveman Oog gets himself a neat tool-shaped rock and is holding it in his hand, nobody else can use it because he’s the one who has it, and the only way they could use it is for him to not have it anymore. He controls it and its use is exclusive to him. The rock is his property. The law doesn’t create that concept; it only codifies it so that the rock can remain Oog’s when he sets it down, instead of him having to guard it all day.
“Corporate” “property” “rights” are a whole different thing:
Contrary to the Dred Scott-level bullshit the SCOTUS excreted in Citizens United, corporations are not people and don’t even have an inherent right to exist, let alone any other rights. A person (i.e. a sole proprietor) has rights. People associating with each other (i.e. a full-liability general partnership) have rights. A group granted the privileges of limited liability and taxation as a separate entity via incorporation exists at the pleasure of the State, and the State has every right to impose conditions on that existence in exchange for granting the privilege.
Copyright is not “property.” A copyrighted work is an expression of an idea, and ideas are as near to opposite of property as it is possible to be. Not only does an idea stand in stark contrast to Oog’s rock in that it can be freely shared to the other cavemen without Oog losing possession of it, the value of it comes from the act of sharing. A creative work that never leaves the creator’s head is worthless, while a work shared with the whole world is incredibly valuable. (Don’t take my word for it, though: Thomas Jefferson – the guy who wrote or helped write the Copyright Clause, BTW – made a similar point, more eloquently explained.)
Copyright isn’t a “right” either. It, like incorporation, is a privilege granted by the State (or more specifically, Congress, but Federalism is beside the point). It does not exist because the creator of a work is somehow entitled to it, or even because the People wish to reward creators for their work. Copyright exists for the sole and express purpose “to promote the progress of science and the useful arts” – in other words, to enrich the Public Domain. The mechanism of copyright, granting a temporary monopoly in order to encourage the creation of more works than would otherwise exist, is nothing more than a means to an end. The goal of copyright is for it to expire!
Anyway, point is, I’m kinda already making that distinction between basic human dignity (natural rights) and artificial laws (copyright). The situation we find ourselves in today, where actual property rights of actual people are being subordinated to
IntellectualImaginary Property “rights” of imaginary “people” is some pants-on-head stupid, ass-backwards, Bizarro-world bullshit!I honestly can’t tell if this is treading into sovcit territory or not.
I mean, if this makes me a sovcit then it means Thomas Jefferson was one too, so at least I’m in good company.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s not. Protecting natural rights is the justification for a state in the first place.
‘natural rights’ okay so why are they right(s)?