If you come in here looking for "anime recommendations" then please refer to this chart before posting: Anime Recommendations (as of may 2014). We also have an IRC channel called #tladt where we all hang out. The channel is on Rizon, not QuakeNet! Feel free to check it out. TLADT discord is Discord.gg
For currently airing anime, please see Anichart.net
On January 28 2012 08:06 xrapture wrote: I don't understand how so many of you can support theft.
... Really?
Since when is OK to steal if you can't afford something and don't like the alternatives?
"I really want this Rolex watch, but I can't afford it. I don't like the cheaper watches either, I guess I'll steal the Rolex!"
Pirating isn't stealing.
Granted it is similar in that you get something without paying for it, but it's different because the company doesn't physically lose anything.
Easily put: - If you steal that Rolex, the company can no longer sell it to someone and gain a profit. It is a complete lose.
- If you pirate a movie (or any sort of media), the company is losing a potential sale. They are no worse off if you pirate the movie than if you didn't. The only reason it's considered a loss at all is because had you not pirated the movie the only alternative to getting it would have been buying it, which would have given them money. Companies (by default) assume that everyone that pirates things would have bought what they pirated had they been unable to pirate it, which is completely untrue.
We can argue all day about how people with no propensity to spend pirate, but since they wouldn't have spend anyway it is no actual loss to content provider. The act is still identical. It is still stealing. Why try to justify it?
Sure it makes sense economically, ethically it is still stealing. The loss incurred is not at the level they would suggest. You are still paying nothing to get something, which you shouldn't be able to.
When did I try to justify it?
You also missed part of my point, which is that a company doesn't physically lose anything, even if you pirate the company can still sell just as much because you didn't physically steal anything.
Bringing ethics into it is pretty weird. Is me watching a movie at my friends house any different from me pirating one? The alternative is the same either way - I would have had to buy it to see it otherwise. Just because its my friend that owns the movie doesn't mean I'm not getting the same experience (watching it) that I would have gotten had I pirated it or if I had bought it. So is that stealing? What if I borrowed the movie from the friend, then gave it back? What if I borrowed it and we both forgot about it and I never gave it back? The end result is always the same, I watched the movie without paying for it, the execution is the only difference.
I'm not advocating pirating, I'm saying the definition as it stands now is wrong and needs to properly adjusted.
-------
That was pretty long so I'll say something a bit more on topic lol.
I'm liking the main characters of Nichijou a bit more now. It seems later into the series they slow down with the retarded faces and a bunch of the side characters get more screen time.
So if I go torrent the entire text of The Game of Thrones series it's a grey line because George R R Martin didn't physically lose anything?
I think he was saying that it is not ethically identical to stealing, as Ecael claimed.
Certainly, I think that torrenting a copy online is less ethically objectionable than stealing a book from a bookstore, for reasons that have already been brought up. I'm not claiming either is ethical, but Ecael is arguing that they are equally bad.
Edit - I am 110% certain I never would have gotten into anime if pirated copies of anime did not exist. So in my case, the industry is ~40$ ahead because piracy exists :p
You guys are just watching the wrong shows. You need to only watch anime that are actually just 20 minute toy commercials, and then buy a whole bunch of Gunpla being advertised in the commercial and build them. If someone is going to start telling me that I'm pirating a toy commercial, I'm going to laugh at them.
On January 28 2012 08:06 xrapture wrote: I don't understand how so many of you can support theft.
... Really?
Since when is OK to steal if you can't afford something and don't like the alternatives?
"I really want this Rolex watch, but I can't afford it. I don't like the cheaper watches either, I guess I'll steal the Rolex!"
Pirating isn't stealing.
Granted it is similar in that you get something without paying for it, but it's different because the company doesn't physically lose anything.
Easily put: - If you steal that Rolex, the company can no longer sell it to someone and gain a profit. It is a complete lose.
- If you pirate a movie (or any sort of media), the company is losing a potential sale. They are no worse off if you pirate the movie than if you didn't. The only reason it's considered a loss at all is because had you not pirated the movie the only alternative to getting it would have been buying it, which would have given them money. Companies (by default) assume that everyone that pirates things would have bought what they pirated had they been unable to pirate it, which is completely untrue.
We can argue all day about how people with no propensity to spend pirate, but since they wouldn't have spend anyway it is no actual loss to content provider. The act is still identical. It is still stealing. Why try to justify it?
Sure it makes sense economically, ethically it is still stealing. The loss incurred is not at the level they would suggest. You are still paying nothing to get something, which you shouldn't be able to.
When did I try to justify it?
You also missed part of my point, which is that a company doesn't physically lose anything, even if you pirate the company can still sell just as much because you didn't physically steal anything.
Bringing ethics into it is pretty weird. Is me watching a movie at my friends house any different from me pirating one? The alternative is the same either way - I would have had to buy it to see it otherwise. Just because its my friend that owns the movie doesn't mean I'm not getting the same experience (watching it) that I would have gotten had I pirated it or if I had bought it. So is that stealing? What if I borrowed the movie from the friend, then gave it back? What if I borrowed it and we both forgot about it and I never gave it back? The end result is always the same, I watched the movie without paying for it, the execution is the only difference.
I'm not advocating pirating, I'm saying the definition as it stands now is wrong and needs to properly adjusted.
-------
That was pretty long so I'll say something a bit more on topic lol.
I'm liking the main characters of Nichijou a bit more now. It seems later into the series they slow down with the retarded faces and a bunch of the side characters get more screen time.
So if I go torrent the entire text of The Game of Thrones series it's a grey line because George R R Martin didn't physically lose anything?
I think he was saying that it is not ethically identical to stealing, as Ecael claimed.
Certainly, I think that torrenting a copy online is less ethically objectionable than stealing a book from a bookstore, for reasons that have already been brought up. I'm not claiming either is ethical, but Ecael is arguing that they are equally bad.
Edit - I am 110% certain I never would have gotten into anime if pirated copies of anime did not exist. So in my case, the industry is ~40$ ahead because piracy exists :p
Usage of a non-rivalrous good or service that you were supposed to pay for but didn't is still theft. Someone still had to pay money to provide that good/service and expects a return on it.
Now, when there is a problem with distribution and actual collection of payment that's a slightly more complicated issue... but if you're supporting them how you can then great! If you're just freeloading and using this as an excuse then booo, hiss!
On January 28 2012 09:54 Sentenal wrote: You guys are just watching the wrong shows. You need to only watch anime that are actually just 20 minute toy commercials, and then buy a whole bunch of Gunpla being advertised in the commercial and build them. If someone is going to start telling me that I'm pirating a toy commercial, I'm going to laugh at them.
On January 28 2012 08:06 xrapture wrote: I don't understand how so many of you can support theft.
... Really?
Since when is OK to steal if you can't afford something and don't like the alternatives?
"I really want this Rolex watch, but I can't afford it. I don't like the cheaper watches either, I guess I'll steal the Rolex!"
Pirating isn't stealing.
Granted it is similar in that you get something without paying for it, but it's different because the company doesn't physically lose anything.
Easily put: - If you steal that Rolex, the company can no longer sell it to someone and gain a profit. It is a complete lose.
- If you pirate a movie (or any sort of media), the company is losing a potential sale. They are no worse off if you pirate the movie than if you didn't. The only reason it's considered a loss at all is because had you not pirated the movie the only alternative to getting it would have been buying it, which would have given them money. Companies (by default) assume that everyone that pirates things would have bought what they pirated had they been unable to pirate it, which is completely untrue.
We can argue all day about how people with no propensity to spend pirate, but since they wouldn't have spend anyway it is no actual loss to content provider. The act is still identical. It is still stealing. Why try to justify it?
Sure it makes sense economically, ethically it is still stealing. The loss incurred is not at the level they would suggest. You are still paying nothing to get something, which you shouldn't be able to.
When did I try to justify it?
You also missed part of my point, which is that a company doesn't physically lose anything, even if you pirate the company can still sell just as much because you didn't physically steal anything.
Bringing ethics into it is pretty weird. Is me watching a movie at my friends house any different from me pirating one? The alternative is the same either way - I would have had to buy it to see it otherwise. Just because its my friend that owns the movie doesn't mean I'm not getting the same experience (watching it) that I would have gotten had I pirated it or if I had bought it. So is that stealing? What if I borrowed the movie from the friend, then gave it back? What if I borrowed it and we both forgot about it and I never gave it back? The end result is always the same, I watched the movie without paying for it, the execution is the only difference.
I'm not advocating pirating, I'm saying the definition as it stands now is wrong and needs to properly adjusted.
-------
That was pretty long so I'll say something a bit more on topic lol.
I'm liking the main characters of Nichijou a bit more now. It seems later into the series they slow down with the retarded faces and a bunch of the side characters get more screen time.
So if I go torrent the entire text of The Game of Thrones series it's a grey line because George R R Martin didn't physically lose anything?
I think he was saying that it is not ethically identical to stealing, as Ecael claimed.
Certainly, I think that torrenting a copy online is less ethically objectionable than stealing a book from a bookstore, for reasons that have already been brought up. I'm not claiming either is ethical, but Ecael is arguing that they are equally bad.
Usage of a non-rivalrous good or service that you were supposed to pay for but didn't is still theft. Someone still had to pay money to provide that good/service and expects a return on it.
By that definition, running adblock is theft. It's something, but I don't think "theft" is the right word, so I think your definition of theft doesn't work.
If it wasn't for pirating anime, Bandai wouldn't have gotten nearly as much money out of me as otherwise. I dunno how much I've spent on Gunpla, but got like 2 dozen models right now, each ranging from like $20 to $60.
Edit: Oh yeah, I've given Harmony Gold a ton of money as well. Harmony Gold and Bandai OP.
On January 28 2012 10:00 Sentenal wrote: If it wasn't for pirating anime, Bandai wouldn't have gotten nearly as much money out of me as otherwise. I dunno how much I've spent on Gunpla, but got like 2 dozen models right now, each ranging from like $20 to $60.
Its funny, looking around my room now I have a bunch of anime crap that I didnt realize I had.
-Yui Hirasawa Nendoroid -K-ON! Season 1 DVD first volume
I also have Ika Musume, Ohana-chan, and Morishima-senpai Nendoroids pre-ordered.
I guess thats my way of giving back to the anime industry.
On January 28 2012 08:06 xrapture wrote: I don't understand how so many of you can support theft.
... Really?
Since when is OK to steal if you can't afford something and don't like the alternatives?
"I really want this Rolex watch, but I can't afford it. I don't like the cheaper watches either, I guess I'll steal the Rolex!"
Pirating isn't stealing.
Granted it is similar in that you get something without paying for it, but it's different because the company doesn't physically lose anything.
Easily put: - If you steal that Rolex, the company can no longer sell it to someone and gain a profit. It is a complete lose.
- If you pirate a movie (or any sort of media), the company is losing a potential sale. They are no worse off if you pirate the movie than if you didn't. The only reason it's considered a loss at all is because had you not pirated the movie the only alternative to getting it would have been buying it, which would have given them money. Companies (by default) assume that everyone that pirates things would have bought what they pirated had they been unable to pirate it, which is completely untrue.
We can argue all day about how people with no propensity to spend pirate, but since they wouldn't have spend anyway it is no actual loss to content provider. The act is still identical. It is still stealing. Why try to justify it?
Sure it makes sense economically, ethically it is still stealing. The loss incurred is not at the level they would suggest. You are still paying nothing to get something, which you shouldn't be able to.
When did I try to justify it?
You also missed part of my point, which is that a company doesn't physically lose anything, even if you pirate the company can still sell just as much because you didn't physically steal anything.
Bringing ethics into it is pretty weird. Is me watching a movie at my friends house any different from me pirating one? The alternative is the same either way - I would have had to buy it to see it otherwise. Just because its my friend that owns the movie doesn't mean I'm not getting the same experience (watching it) that I would have gotten had I pirated it or if I had bought it. So is that stealing? What if I borrowed the movie from the friend, then gave it back? What if I borrowed it and we both forgot about it and I never gave it back? The end result is always the same, I watched the movie without paying for it, the execution is the only difference.
I'm not advocating pirating, I'm saying the definition as it stands now is wrong and needs to properly adjusted.
-------
That was pretty long so I'll say something a bit more on topic lol.
I'm liking the main characters of Nichijou a bit more now. It seems later into the series they slow down with the retarded faces and a bunch of the side characters get more screen time.
So if I go torrent the entire text of The Game of Thrones series it's a grey line because George R R Martin didn't physically lose anything?
I think he was saying that it is not ethically identical to stealing, as Ecael claimed.
Certainly, I think that torrenting a copy online is less ethically objectionable than stealing a book from a bookstore, for reasons that have already been brought up. I'm not claiming either is ethical, but Ecael is arguing that they are equally bad.
Usage of a non-rivalrous good or service that you were supposed to pay for but didn't is still theft. Someone still had to pay money to provide that good/service and expects a return on it.
By that definition, running adblock is theft. It's something, but I don't think "theft" is the right word, so I think your definition of theft doesn't work.
On January 28 2012 08:06 xrapture wrote: I don't understand how so many of you can support theft.
... Really?
Since when is OK to steal if you can't afford something and don't like the alternatives?
"I really want this Rolex watch, but I can't afford it. I don't like the cheaper watches either, I guess I'll steal the Rolex!"
Pirating isn't stealing.
Granted it is similar in that you get something without paying for it, but it's different because the company doesn't physically lose anything.
Easily put: - If you steal that Rolex, the company can no longer sell it to someone and gain a profit. It is a complete lose.
- If you pirate a movie (or any sort of media), the company is losing a potential sale. They are no worse off if you pirate the movie than if you didn't. The only reason it's considered a loss at all is because had you not pirated the movie the only alternative to getting it would have been buying it, which would have given them money. Companies (by default) assume that everyone that pirates things would have bought what they pirated had they been unable to pirate it, which is completely untrue.
We can argue all day about how people with no propensity to spend pirate, but since they wouldn't have spend anyway it is no actual loss to content provider. The act is still identical. It is still stealing. Why try to justify it?
Sure it makes sense economically, ethically it is still stealing. The loss incurred is not at the level they would suggest. You are still paying nothing to get something, which you shouldn't be able to.
When did I try to justify it?
You also missed part of my point, which is that a company doesn't physically lose anything, even if you pirate the company can still sell just as much because you didn't physically steal anything.
Bringing ethics into it is pretty weird. Is me watching a movie at my friends house any different from me pirating one? The alternative is the same either way - I would have had to buy it to see it otherwise. Just because its my friend that owns the movie doesn't mean I'm not getting the same experience (watching it) that I would have gotten had I pirated it or if I had bought it. So is that stealing? What if I borrowed the movie from the friend, then gave it back? What if I borrowed it and we both forgot about it and I never gave it back? The end result is always the same, I watched the movie without paying for it, the execution is the only difference.
I'm not advocating pirating, I'm saying the definition as it stands now is wrong and needs to properly adjusted.
-------
That was pretty long so I'll say something a bit more on topic lol.
I'm liking the main characters of Nichijou a bit more now. It seems later into the series they slow down with the retarded faces and a bunch of the side characters get more screen time.
So if I go torrent the entire text of The Game of Thrones series it's a grey line because George R R Martin didn't physically lose anything?
I think he was saying that it is not ethically identical to stealing, as Ecael claimed.
Certainly, I think that torrenting a copy online is less ethically objectionable than stealing a book from a bookstore, for reasons that have already been brought up. I'm not claiming either is ethical, but Ecael is arguing that they are equally bad.
Usage of a non-rivalrous good or service that you were supposed to pay for but didn't is still theft. Someone still had to pay money to provide that good/service and expects a return on it.
By that definition, running adblock is theft. It's something, but I don't think "theft" is the right word, so I think your definition of theft doesn't work.
Shall we use robbery instead? Streamers do occasionally beg for people to turn off adblock. It is even more indirect than the piracy situation so it feels even more disconnected, but if we should boil it back down to paying [in ad watching] for service [stream] then sure, why not?
On January 28 2012 10:00 Sentenal wrote: If it wasn't for pirating anime, Bandai wouldn't have gotten nearly as much money out of me as otherwise. I dunno how much I've spent on Gunpla, but got like 2 dozen models right now, each ranging from like $20 to $60.
Edit: Oh yeah, I've given Harmony Gold a ton of money as well. Harmony Gold and Bandai OP.
On January 28 2012 10:00 Sentenal wrote: If it wasn't for pirating anime, Bandai wouldn't have gotten nearly as much money out of me as otherwise. I dunno how much I've spent on Gunpla, but got like 2 dozen models right now, each ranging from like $20 to $60.
Its funny, looking around my room now I have a bunch of anime crap that I didnt realize I had.
-Yui Hirasawa Nendoroid -K-ON! Season 1 DVD first volume
I also have Ika Musume, Ohana-chan, and Morishima-senpai Nendoroids pre-ordered.
I guess thats my way of giving back to the anime industry.
Basically, because content distribution sucks people take it into their own hands to distribute content. Because of that, you people contribute in a way. It is about as good as how things will work without them getting serious on tapping the international market, yeah. Doesn't really justify the act though.
imo need more 20min gunpla commercials so we can all spend more.
I've exhausted my list of anime to watch, I've pretty much seen all the gundam/mech shows, most popular anime (think ones that get dubbed) and a lot of terrible slice of life/romance. I really am not too picky, but I try to stick to things that have a bit of each genre and not extremes. Any recommendations?
Edit: If your wondering, yes, I have seen everything on that list.
On January 28 2012 11:42 Leftwing wrote: I've exhausted my list of anime to watch, I've pretty much seen all the gundam/mech shows, most popular anime (think ones that get dubbed) and a lot of terrible slice of life/romance. I really am not too picky, but I try to stick to things that have a bit of each genre and not extremes. Any recommendations?
Edit: If your wondering, yes, I have seen everything on that list.
On January 28 2012 11:42 Leftwing wrote: I've exhausted my list of anime to watch, I've pretty much seen all the gundam/mech shows, most popular anime (think ones that get dubbed) and a lot of terrible slice of life/romance. I really am not too picky, but I try to stick to things that have a bit of each genre and not extremes. Any recommendations?
Edit: If your wondering, yes, I have seen everything on that list.
Do you have a MAL, so I can see a list of what all you have watched? Because if you have seen that much, you will likely only get recs you have already seen.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cgBAz.png)
