Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th Feb 2010 20:56 UTC
Windows Sometimes, you come across news items that make you go "eh...?" This is definitely one of them: Microsoft has announced a new anti-piracy update for Windows 7 that phones home every 90 days to check for new activation cracks, but the update is entirely optional - which kind of makes me wonder about the point.
Thread beginning with comment 409106
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by chaosotter
by Surtur on Fri 12th Feb 2010 21:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by chaosotter"
Surtur
Member since:
2009-04-15

"Neither my car, nor my house, nor any of my other possessions accuse me of having stolen them every 90 days.


If you could make an infinite number of copies of your house/car for $0, they probably would. Therein lies the distinction. And it probably wouldn't be optional either.
"

Economics 101: Economy is about the allocation of scarce goods. Notice the word scarce (-> Scarcity).

Therefore it is in my opinion a bad idea to argue about a world with infinite tangible goods based on the understanding of a world with finite tangible goods. What sort of business model would this be based on? That's a different question...

Edited 2010-02-12 21:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by chaosotter
by WorknMan on Fri 12th Feb 2010 23:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by chaosotter"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Therefore it is in my opinion a bad idea to argue about a world with infinite tangible goods based on the understanding of a world with finite tangible goods. What sort of business model would this be based on? That's a different question...


I don't know what you're saying, but if your point is that it's kind of retarded to try to sell something you can make infinite copies of for $0, I can't really argue that point. On the other hand, trying to argue that this same something is the same as a physical good and should be treated as such is equally as retarded. Even pirates know this, as they'll tell you that downloading an album for free is not the same as walking into a store and walking out the door with a stolen CD ...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by chaosotter
by Surtur on Tue 16th Feb 2010 12:50 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by chaosotter"
Surtur Member since:
2009-04-15

Sorry, was maybe a bit vague.

My point was about living in an world you (and "lemor2") imagine and being able to reproduce infinite numbers of physical goods with really no additional costs.

You then argue based on a quote of "lemur2" that in this world people would be accused of stealing if they reproduce physical goods.

I just wanted to state that *I* think the whole economy and society of the countries in this world would in *my* opinion look probably different and arguing that it of course looks the same as nowadays on this world and everybody is accusing others of stealing is not necessarely true.

Sure you still have the costs of making *one* copy. Which the whole argument about copyright, patents, etc. is based on. (Don't get me wrong I don't think this is necessarely always a good or bad thing.)

> On the other hand, trying to argue that this same something is the same as a physical good and should be treated as such is equally as retarded.

Sorry, I am not sure if I understand you correctly ("this same something is the same as" confuses me a bit) but if I do, I agree with you.

Edited 2010-02-16 12:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1