undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjamesbritt15y ago0 comments

"but it's still taking something "

taking ? Or copying?

Something? Or some representation?

A problem with these discussions is that people use common words as if everyone had the same understanding of their meaning and application.

If I download a movie, I'm not taking that movie. And what I end up with is not a thing; if I then move it over to another drive, no thing has moved, yet the movie can be watched.

Now, in the end, this action it may or may not be wrong or immoral or whatever, but arguments based on physical notions of "take", "thing", "own" are putting the cart before the horse.

0 pointsjamesbritt15y ago0 comments

"but it's still taking something "

taking ? Or copying?

Something? Or some representation?

A problem with these discussions is that people use common words as if everyone had the same understanding of their meaning and application.

If I download a movie, I'm not taking that movie. And what I end up with is not a thing; if I then move it over to another drive, no thing has moved, yet the movie can be watched.

Now, in the end, this action it may or may not be wrong or immoral or whatever, but arguments based on physical notions of "take", "thing", "own" are putting the cart before the horse.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

citricsquid15y ago· 2 in thread

taking = gaining possession of [item]

taking doesn't have to be negative and it's not a word associated with either side of the discussion, it's just a word. I can take $10 from my mum to pay for dinner, or take a magazine from a shop (after paying for it), it's just the opposite of give. You can take with permission, that's why I stated take without.

kijinbear15y ago

When you take $10 from your mom, your mom no longer has that $10. When you pay money to buy a magazine, the shop no longer has that magazine and you no longer have the money. Taking in the usual sense is moving.

But pirates insist that they can "take" without depriving the owner of anything. That's copying, which is a different kind of taking. It gets even more complicated if somebody first purchases a legitimate copy of a song or a movie, and then produces more copies to share with other people. You run the fallacy of equivocation when you use the word "taking" in both senses.

citricsquid15y ago

My usage of "take" is insignificant, it's just a word in my argument. You can "take help" you can "take ideas" and they're not physical.

Please don't focus on the word "take", instead the actual argument :|

2 more replies

JoeAltmaier15y ago

So, copying a representation belonging to someone else is "not stealing"? Is that the goal of this semantic fudging - somehow its not so bad?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse