Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by gamer_reg, Jun 4, 2013.

  1. gamer_reg

    PeterN Guest

    I don't.
    [/QUOTE]

    Very likely because he doesn't want to.
     
    PeterN, Jun 28, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  2. My bike has an owner.
    It surely is property.
    Is it IP?

    Bike? possibly.[2]

    Thoughts (even embodied on paper (books, blueprints, ...), in
    numbers (digitally, that is), or in the way a thing is build or
    operates (patent law?)) aren't appropriated. They are copied.

    At worst you can steal all physical copies embodying the
    principle[1] and the original creator can't (or can only
    with lots of work) recreate the thoughs. Appropriating these
    physical object may be theft[2]. The transfer of knowledge
    isn't theft, however; that transfer is handled by other laws.

    -Wolfgang

    [1] or destroy these embodyments
    [2] it could be fraud, it could be robbery, ... instead of theft
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jun 28, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  3. Obviously.

    You're so entrenched in your thinking that the whole idea of
    service goes WHOOSH right over your head.

    Please never find out how Red Hat makes money. Your head
    would explode.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jun 28, 2013
  4. gamer_reg

    Whisky-dave Guest

    yes I know you don't understand that was my point.
     
    Whisky-dave, Jun 28, 2013
  5. gamer_reg

    Whisky-dave Guest

     
    Whisky-dave, Jun 28, 2013
  6. gamer_reg

    PeterN Guest

     
    PeterN, Jun 28, 2013
  7. gamer_reg

    J. Clarke Guest

    Actually it's quite relevant. I tried marijuana in the '60s, found it
    didn't do much for me, and haven't had any interest in it since. I'm
    also a two pack a decade smoker--every once in a while I'll get a
    hankering for a cigarette, buy a pack, smoke them all, and not touch
    them for another 10 years or so. I've also been on various supposedly
    highly addictive medications for certain medical conditions, and never
    understood why anybody would take them for recreation--too high a dose
    made me feel bad, not good.

    The chemistry by which this occurs is in fact irrelevant to the
    observational fact that many people who try drugs do not become
    addicted.

    In 1898 Bayer developed what they believed to be a nonaddictive
    painkiller stronger than Morphine. They tested it and their test
    subjects did not become addicted, so they took it to market, not only as
    an analgesic but also as a cough suppressant. There were more than a
    hundred papers published about it over the next five years, few of which
    found any indication that it was addictive. It wasn't until hospitals
    started filling up with addicts that its addictive potential was
    recognized.

    The name of this medication? "Heroin".
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 28, 2013
  8. gamer_reg

    Sandman Guest

    yes I know you don't understand that was my point.[/QUOTE]

    You don't have a point.
     
    Sandman, Jun 28, 2013
  9. gamer_reg

    PeterN Guest

    I agree. There are too many unknown factors.

    I have been fortunate in that although I was taking Oxy for some severe
    pain, I had the luck to be able to stop. In school I would take uppers,
    and just stop, right after the exam. Although I drink, I do not do so,
    other than for social reasons. I know people who cannot stop smoking,
    because on an addiction to nicotine.
    Not everybody is affected the same way. I have a friend who is very
    proud of himself, that he only drinks in the evening. I have another
    friend who has been sober for over 17 years. If he touches a drop, it
    would force him into a relapse, where he could not control his consumption.
    my point is that people react in different ways. Yes, there was a lot of
    false propaganda on the evils of marijuana, and that one drag leads down
    a slippery slope. For the majority of people it is a myth. However, I
    have seen enough to know not to make a blanket assumption that something
    is perfectly safe. That is the implication to which I object.
    BTW I strongly believe that medical marijuana should be legalized. I had
    a friend with prion disease, who was in constant pain, and given six
    months to live. The A-holes at his hospital were carefully regulating
    his morphine because they didn't want him to become addicted.
    IIRC I have seen some studies showing that marijuana arrests brain
    development, although I have no personal interest in pursuing them.
     
    PeterN, Jun 29, 2013
  10. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    exactly my point, so why did you attack?
     
    Guest, Jun 29, 2013
  11. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    as you like to say, 'whoosh'.
     
    Guest, Jun 29, 2013
  12. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    both of those statements are false.
     
    Guest, Jun 29, 2013
  13. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    that doesn't contradict what i said.
     
    Guest, Jun 29, 2013
  14. gamer_reg

    PeterN Guest

    You are so fragile, that you consider any discussion to be an attack. i
    stated you made an unwarranted generalization. There are some recent
    reports of studies that excessive use of marijuana can have an adverse
    effect on brain development. While I read about them, I did not quote
    them since I have not looked at the details, nor analyzed the methodology.
    However, the original issue was theft of services being the equivalent
    of theft of property, not use of illegal substances. You changed the topic.
     
    PeterN, Jun 29, 2013
  15. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    i'm not fragile at all. i'm just pointing out your hypocrisy and lies.

    here's what you said:


    that looks like an attack to me. it's definitely *not* a discussion.
    if what i said was an unwarranted generalization (which it isn't but
    let's assume it is for now), then why did you later say the same thing?

    that can only mean that you *also* made an unwarranted generalization.
    more twisting. that wasn't the issue.
    i did no such thing.

    copyright infringement was the original issue and then savageduck said
    pirating a song will lead to hard core crimes (see above).

    i said that's the same myth of pot being a gateway drug, and you
    *agree* with that. you're so hard up to argue that you argue even when
    you aren't disagreeing. crazy.
     
    Guest, Jun 29, 2013
  16. gamer_reg

    Savageduck Guest

    Boy! Did you ever misinterpret what I wrote.

    Nowhere did I say anything about "hard core crimes". What I said was;
    "There is also a morality component to all of this, especially when
    starting at a young age, kids see no wrong in illegal music or software
    downloads. Ultimately this can develop into a criminal mindset, ...."

    These same kids as adults see no wrong with heading to a torrent site,
    or a binary NG and illegally download material such as copyrighted
    music and movies, as well as intellectual property such as pirated
    software. We even have our own Dutch advocate of such behavior,
    "Sobrique" who unashamedly holds that he has a right to steal such
    property. Regrettably there are many like him.

    The developed criminal mindset of which I speak is the leap from a 12
    year old making opportunistic illegal music downloads to an adult
    pirating valuable software as he/she sees no wrong in that behavior.
    Theft is theft regardless of the type of theft, or however the web
    pedants care to define it, or how much the proponents of illegal
    downloading or SW/intellectual property pirating try to rationalize it.

    Personally I have never held that marijuana is a gateway drug, I know
    too many folks who transcended the 60's & 70's to believe that.
     
    Savageduck, Jun 29, 2013
  17. gamer_reg

    Tony Cooper Guest

    The sentence said "OK intellectual property is property that has an
    owner". Use of the abbreviation, IP, does not change the meaning.

    Surely, you understand the difference between intellectual property
    and physical property and which of the two includes a bicycle.
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 30, 2013
  18. gamer_reg

    PeterN Guest

    As I said earlier, I have no need to spend time researching to prove
    your fallacy.
    Bye
    Unless of course you want to make appropriate financial arrangements.
    I'll go so far as to say if I'm wrong, you don't pay.
     
    PeterN, Jun 30, 2013
  19. gamer_reg

    Guest Guest

    Boy! Did you ever misinterpret what I wrote.

    Nowhere did I say anything about "hard core crimes". What I said was;
    "There is also a morality component to all of this, especially when
    starting at a young age, kids see no wrong in illegal music or software
    downloads. Ultimately this can develop into a criminal mindset, ...."[/QUOTE]

    it 'can', but it usually doesn't. *that* is the point.

    people know the difference between pirating music versus more serious
    crimes. pirating a song doesn't mean they're going to have a life of
    crime, what you call a criminal mindset.
    not that many. most people are honest.

    not everyone is, but that's just how things are.
    are you referring to a 12 year old you know? if so, that's a sample
    size of one, so it's meaningless.
    it's not web pedants or proponents that make that claim. it's how the
    law defines it.
    similarly, there are many folks who pirated stuff on napster or kazaa
    and later *bought* the music.

    it was a way to sample music they otherwise would never have tried
    because they didn't want to risk paying $10-20 for an album and find
    that most of the songs were crap.
     
    Guest, Jun 30, 2013
  20. gamer_reg

    Savageduck Guest

    it 'can', but it usually doesn't. *that* is the point.

    people know the difference between pirating music versus more serious
    crimes. pirating a song doesn't mean they're going to have a life of
    crime, what you call a criminal mindset.
    not that many. most people are honest.

    not everyone is, but that's just how things are.
    are you referring to a 12 year old you know? if so, that's a sample
    size of one, so it's meaningless.
    it's not web pedants or proponents that make that claim. it's how the
    law defines it.
    similarly, there are many folks who pirated stuff on napster or kazaa
    and later *bought* the music.

    it was a way to sample music they otherwise would never have tried
    because they didn't want to risk paying $10-20 for an album and find
    that most of the songs were crap.[/QUOTE]

    You missed my point entirely.
    There is little to be gained by being drawn deeper into the nospam
    vortex on this issue.
     
    Savageduck, Jun 30, 2013
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.