安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题
Martikainen paper:
https://techpolicyinstitute.org/files/smith_danaher_telang_ipe%20chapter.pdf
Yes, you keep quoting the same author as if he is G_D. He's not. On page 26 he makes a social value argument against piracy that I've already shown is both intellectually dishonest and logically insane. ("If hypothetically everyone pirated a film, would the film be made" could literally be re-written as "OMG WHAT IF WE WERE ALL COMMUNISTS").
He cites a working paper (2011) before it had been released (2014), which just is naughty.
Also, in an attempt to make a case that there are "only three" papers that suggest that piracy doesn't effect sales he pads his list of those that support it. Of 15 papers, eight (8) are based on limited surveys (university students or consumer surveys - including an amazing paper where a survey of university students concluded that 30% of all music was pirated) and two (2) are his own papers. Of course, three (3) versus seven (7) doesn't look as impressive on the page.
One. Trick. Pony.
No, I've not made that position at all (do I threaten to report you now?): what I've clearly shown is that outside of some fairly rabid industry friendly academics, piracy isn't a reason for games companies to hate their user base.
Self-hatred is not a pretty thing.
No, most gamers aren't pirates (games industry is $93billion world wide).
No, most gamers aren't trash (small vocal groups using #shoutattheworld twitter do not make the majority).
In fact, attitudes such as yours show clearly that you're either being paid or hate yourself and do this for some kind of masochistic self-help. Ugly.
That book chapter happens to be very informative as it is to my knowledge the only time someone has collected all papers relating to the subject matter and analysed the results.
Did the Martikainen paper results change significantly / at all? Nope. Are those criticisms still valid? Yes.
Also, I think you will find that he first restricted the papers to at least peer reviewed, and the tally was 3 papers of no harm due to piracy vs 15 that found harm, to first or second tier published peer reviewed papers, at which point the tally was a whopping 1 paper of no harm to 11 of harm. And there were several issues and inconsistencies with that 1 dated paper to boot.
The higher quality the paper, the more significant the result.
The science just isn't on your side. Especially the high quality science.
Go back to browsing propaganda leaflets from the Pirate Party, maybe they have some instructions for you how to conduct the debate further. Maybe some (toilet) papers, lol.
Please do not throw baseless and preposterous accusations.
I can't speak for you, but none of us here pirate games. And no one is going to even try to argue in favour of piracy because it is against the rules.
When your definition of "quality science" is eight (8) papers based on university student surveys, then you know your degree is worthless.
Let's go through the list, shall we?
University student survey? Nope.
Nope.
Yep.
Nope.
Yep.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Yep.
Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Yep.
Yep.
Nope.
I count 5 out of 15 papers that are based on student surveys. Whatever your objections to that might be (you still haven't specified what your issues are with each individual paper).
So what did we establish? If we limit it to quality peer reviewed publications (1st and 2nd tier), the tally becomes 1 vs 11, with 3 of those student surveys falling off. Quite a disconnect in the academic world regarding whether piracy is on the whole harmful to sales.
+1
It really is that simple.
But some people don't even believe the peer reviewed science, relying instead on anectodal evidence of personal of experience (look my buddy does this therefore it is the way of the world and I win the internet with that argument).
To be honest them lot seem to be arguing the extent to which piracy is harmful, not that it is (at least I hope so - if they are arguing that it's a net benefit they are deluded and part of the entitled (like that word) Pirate Party).
Evidence show there are plenty of lost sales, as common sense would dictate what with these crazy piracy rates that DRM free developers themselves have revealed.
There is the other side of the coin. No pun intended. Some people stand to profit considerably from piracy, and pirates themselves would love to keep pirating. It's good to question the motives of some of these 0-level accounts sometimes.
http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_10.html
It doesn't matter what the core of the argument is, if it's not open minded and polite, then it's just another argument.
Yeah, I don't know at which point a Steam forum discussion devolves into 'argument' territory, but my understanding is that if the dialogue is informative and without ad homs, it's still worthy discussing it. I would hope this thread has mostly been that - nobody is trolling or flaming that I can see and there has been plenty of material for anyone to make their own opinion on the matter, disregarding or including the academic research on the matter.
If you want ugly, try promoting Steam DRM or any DRM in the GOG discussion forums. Messy, messy, messy xd
DRM at the same time punishes the paying customers while not doing much to hinder the actual pirates.
Punishing the innocent for the actions of the guilty is also wrong and immoral, but here we have one going on and on about how it is justified because companies are supposed to be greedy and most gamers are supposed to be thieves.
Not that any of it has anything to do with the topic at hand, but when all you have is a hammer you see everything as nails.
It hardly punishes anyone. All you need is an internet connection which most people have. Bad apples ruin things for good people. That is the way of the world. Don't blame the people that develop the games you enjoy. They deserve your respect and definitely deserve to be paid for their work. Blame the people that made that step necessary (and it WAS truly necessary). If it wasn't for them it wouldn't have had to happen.
Try to apply that logic to how the law works and you will see how ridiculous that analogy is.
You can support corporate greed all you want and yes it is nothing but greed, but please don't try to justify it.
Also, while not doing much (define much)to hinder pirates, it is doing something, and seems to be the current balance point for unintrusiveness and eliminating casual sharing, second hand market and hindering zero-day piracy. Are you saying that the makers of these games are not...lol...entitled to protect their creations even a little bit?
Necessary evil. Tell people to stop pirating. Though these days DRM acts also as market control and datamining tool, apart from its technical functions added to that, so I don't see it going anywhere anytime soon.
Most business practices in the modern world are immoral. Most consumer practices are equally immoral too.
I don't either see how DRM really contributes much to the topic at hand other than oh wait...was it you who brought it up as an anti-consumer practice by developers. ANd what? You expected none of us to say that well, there is such a thing known as piracy, and the second hand market.