NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8492839" data-attributes="member: 177">I didn't put it that way.  I didn't mention prohibition. I don't know where you got that from! If I'm not reading your arguments clearly, maybe you aren't reading mine so well either?And that's fine.  I find nothing objectionable in that position.  However, I also find nothing objectionable with the position that not everything in the world always has to be commercially available (if only from the practical standpoint that until recently we couldn't, and we seem to have gotten along just fine with any number of intellectual bits falling into the dustbin of history, so clearly the losses aren't all that tragic), and that we can afford to let some things go, and be none the worse for it.  I'm cool with both of these ideas.I'm not disagreeing with it.  I am trying to say that, to first approximation, there's no real ethical difference between someone arguing that GAZ10 (or Song of the South, or whatever other piece of content) shouldn't be around, and you arguing against them.  And that speaks to the complexity of the issue - whatever ethical differences there are between these two are buried in what harm is being done - and that is incredibly complex, indirect, and difficult to unravel.  Indeed, this is so difficult to manage equitably that we prohibit our government from entering the field!So, in the end my position is the same as yours - this issue is complex, and certainty is not readily available.</blockquote>

Verification