That's absurd. I could potentially believe the conclusion that piracy doesn't take away from sales (that is, most people who pirate would otherwise do without, and not buy a copy). But the idea that many/most (or even some significantly-small percentage) of people who pirate will buy copies of the things they like? No, that doesn't pass the sniff test.
I do. When I was poor – I couldn't do it. Now that I'm wealthy and can afford any book, I prefer to take a quick look at online version and then buy a physical copy.
If you and I would support the works we think are good, why wouldn't others? I keep noticing that people constantly expect worse morals from others than how they claim they are themselves
It's easy to add a "me too" onto the existing list but that's not my point. I think we generally can expect better from the average person than we instinctively do. If 50% of people are just as honest as we are (if we're average persons which, on average, we are), that would be easily worth it if free distribution of a book gets you a 3x bigger reach as compared to when people have to pay up front. I'm not aware of research confirming or refuting this (of course I'd like to believe that information can be free), but it doesn't seem so outlandish to me that we can ignore the option altogether by doing a sniff test
Even if that might be the case now, I doubt that holds if piracy becomes truly widespread.
I would suspect A pirates book B and tells C about it, C buys book B is a lot more common than A pirates book B and likes it enough to buy it
I have no data to support this, and while I have paid for things I could access for free, but I'm sufficiently pessimistic about human nature to think that's the norm.
Piracy has been "truly widespread" for decades now.
Most people who are able to, still pay for things, especially if they're convenient. Even when those services actually add additional restrictions to their access to the media they think they're paying for.
This is true for me! For authors like, I might read a few epubs, then buy their entire series in hardcover (or paperback if no hardcover is available) to have in my bookshelves for rainy days.
That F-Droid requires to do the build ensures all apps provided by F-Droid are free software (as in freedom) and proven to be buildable by someone other than the app developer
> and proven to be buildable by someone other than the app developer
Yup. That's a huge, huge issue - IME especially once Java enters the scene. Developers have all sorts of weird stuff in their global ~/.m2/settings.xml that they set up a decade ago and probably don't even think about... real fun when they hand over the project to someone else.
Do you mean the overall issue or that F-Droid’s guarantees are arguable? The guarantees may not be the whole discussion, but for many they are the most relevant piece.
Edit: or perhaps you mean that isn’t the only way to provide such guarantees, which is the implication I got reading your other replies.
> To be clear, if this happens to you, the physical cartridges that you own will remain playable, without updates, and some previously downloaded digital games may remain accessible.
What about game-key cards? (the cartridges that don't contain the game, but a license to download it)
This could reduce the library of games you can play, if they don't let you download the games you purchased.
PostmarketOS doesn't use downstream kernel trees because those are useless for anything that's not AOSP-based (unless you use terrible hacks like libhybris) and are often not upgradable to newer versions. They rely on "close-to-mainline" kernels that are much closer to real Linux.
reply