248
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱI know a lot of us, myself included, like to believe that piracy allows us to consume problematic media without supporting artists we do not like. But piracy demand also indicates to companies an untapped market that they could tap if they create the right product. HBO is absolutely keeping tabs on piracy of their show now and seeing our traffic the same way Crunchyroll used to keep tabs on pirated fan-translated anime back when they cared.
Also, there is a similar ethical zero-sum game with all other Harry Potter media and products. Normally we can buy on the secondary market if we need a hard copy to scan and rip but don't want to support the creators. But almost every Harry Potter book in circulation is purchased by someone with intention to sell for a profit, and HBO is also likely keeping tabs on sales and resales of DVDs of the old movies. Every time money leaves your bank account for Harry Potter media, you are directly feeding the ecosystem which sustains the Queen of the TERFs.
It's honestly pretty incredible how morally radioactive this one human is. Orson Scott Card is equally repugnant, but the Ender's Game series doesn't even have a small fraction of the market share of Harry Potter (IMHO this is the fault of that movie being just okayish, not good or bad, but that's another topic.) Trump's MAGA movement is comparable in badness, but there really isn't much most of us can do other than voting and never shutting up about how unconstitutional the things he is doing is. Rowling really is comparable to Disney or Nestlé, and she's just one person, not a whole company.
Right now, the only ethical way to consume Harry Potter is watching or reading movies and books on your copies that either:
- you obtained before 2020
- were given to you for free in some non-trackable way, e.g. offline or sneakernet.
There is no ethical Harry Potter consumption within capitalism. We will have to see if this changes once she is dead.
But piracy demand also indicates to companies an untapped market that they could tap if they create the right product
I agree with your conclusion of not watching it, but the reason that companies might observe and take a non-purchase as some kind of hypothetical market signal doesn't seem like the strongest argument for that, especially if people are avoiding the purchase specifically to deny them money for ethical reasons, that's not something they can resolve by making 'the right product'.
If pirating a Harry Potter show provides support to its author, I think that support is going to be more in the form of cultural relevance and mindshare than anything directly financial. Being a fan of an IP gives other people a reason to engage with it because your interest signals things to other people, like it means that by not watching it they might be left out of the loop etc, and since the law enforces property rights over what can be done with it and who can profit, that adds to the power of its owner by influencing the choices and interests of other people in their favor.
That is another reason to avoid it, at least for now. If you don't watch it, you don't talk about it, you don't give them free advertising. Piracy evokes demand in many ways. It will still be around in 20 years when no one is looking, anymore.
i agree OP
fuck the haters and lowkey transphobes
Omg... About to go find out why I should stop reading Orson Scott Card...... Thanks a ton OP.
The fact that the man who wrote Speaker For The Dead is a bigot is mind boggling
He's as rabidly against the existence of gay people as She Who Will Not Be Named is against trans people, he just isn't able to actually do anything about it, partly because a large part of the income from his books is tithed to the LDS church.
Sci fi and lds man. Yeah, I looked it up and was very disappointed. I had never looked up anything about him personally before that
It's shocking to me someone would want to watch this.
Harry Potter was never good. Why would someone even want to read a Harry Potter book obtained before 2020???
The TERF stuff didn't make Harry Potter bad. It always sucked, and people only realized after the TERF stuff.
I'll die on the hill that Cuarón's Prisoner of Azkaban adaptation is the only good HP media.
And not just for the sneaky sex scene in the credits. ;)
I liked Harry Potter but I'm no longer a child.
OP, have you heard of the Streisand effect?
Please reread my post, I think you missed my point.
Boycotts for media work about as well as those for Hogwarts Legacy, not buying a Tesla post 2024, or staying off PSN after Sony announced game discs will no longer be made. Sadly most people don't care about the political views of those who make these things unless it personally affects them. The only successful boycott I've seen recently is Canadians avoiding American goods in supermarkets and even that took an existential threat of annexation for them to act on it.
You'd have an easier time herding cats.
the hogwarts legacy boycott was effective because it showed trans people which cis people in our life didn't actually give a fuck about us or our rights
At least one of those things was very effective (Tesla's sales took a huge dive)
The Montgomery Bus Boycott led to desegregation of the transit system there and helped ignite further civil rights causes, marches, protests etc(although it's still not a complete process the US still discriminating against its Black population)
The Sugar boycott led to the fall of several sugar firms and eventually led to Britain abolishing slavery
The Boycott against Apartheid South Africa led to several south-african companies going bankrupt and eventually to the fall of apartheid
And most pertinent to this discussion as it was against a single person and their revenue streams the origin of the term 'boycott': the shunning of Charles Boycott by Irish people, leading to massive social and political reputational loss, forcing him to flee Ireland
Not to say that boycotting a single show(or all media based on her IP) to harm the profits of a single bigot is quite comparable to ending the triangle trade or South African Apartheid, as said it more like the (successful)Boycott of Charles Boycott. Anyway to say their haven't been successfully boycotts is ahistorical
I didn't say all boycotts are ineffective, merely that most recent ones have been directed at things meant for entertainment and personal use. It takes a big enough threat for enough people to want to do it: slavery, apartheid, segregation, and annexation are. An angry billionaire tweeting their evil bullshit can be, but isn't perceived as such by the general populace enough to avoid purchasing a game licensed from them.
merely that most recent ones have been directed at things meant for entertainment and personal use.
Most are, the Sugar Boycott surprisingly boycotted sugar(a good for personal use) produced by slavery, the Boycott against South Africa boycotted buying goods(for personal use) from South African companies, and included artists refusing to play gigs there and criticism of artists that did, sometime leading to them losing gigs elsewhere like Laura Branigan who lost bookings in the US after playing in SA(entertainment)
An angry billionaire tweeting their evil bullshit can be, but isn't perceived as such by the general populace enough to avoid purchasing a game licensed from them.
After Kanye West's anti-semitic tweets, a boycott of his brands like Yeezy began e.g. His branded Adidas shoes(personal use), his music(entertainment)
Eventually leading to many companies cutting their ties(endorsements, appearances at festivals, selling of 'Yeezy' licensed goods etc) with him, this led to him losing his Billionaire status(he's now worth 'just' $400 million according to forbes, so perhaps not a 'total victory', but seeing Joanne have a similar reduction in wealth and mainstream reputation would lead me to seeing it as a successful boycott),
this shows people can and will get inspired to boycott the licensed products of a billionaire if they tweet some bigoted shit
The pomposity in this post, if harnessed, could power a small town for a week.
'The unmitigated gall of these [redacted]s not to bow and scrape before OBE holder and world's greatest author Joanne Rowling' - that's you, that's how you sound
I’m doing my part
Damn straight!
Even if I wanted to watch a worse version of the movies I already watched, no fucking support for transphobes!
In any case, aside from JKR being a piece of shit who deserves zero support:
These remakes seem completely and utterly unnecessary and of questionable production quality anyway. Why rehash the classic movies that were actually decent adaptations of the source material? Is this one arc really the only story worth telling in that universe?
Boycott it because JKR is a Nazi. Don't watch it because it's yet more Hollywood remake slop.
Is this one arc really the only story worth telling in that universe?
JKR tried with the fantastic beasts films, it failed so hard it only get three out of the five planned films.
they did not fail:
collectively grossed over US$1.8 billion across three films, three times more than the budgeted costs
they just weren’t as successful as the Harry Potter movies, and the second and third films had bad reviews (because they weren’t very good movies. but still, they had audience polls of B+)
yeah no ill do what i want thanks.
most tone deaf post iv read in a long time everyone else is authoritarian so let me tell you what to do,like and think.
I am not saying JK isn't a horrible person, but there are way worse people than her making shows and I have never seen posts like this on them. For example Seinfeld, the guy is a horrible person, this just one example there are a lot of horrible people making shows. All of Hollywood should be boycotted if we are being honest.
"I have no qualms giving money to bad people because I can also give money to worse people"
Yeah, lots of people are either terrible people, or have enough money to fund hate crimes, or are willing to act on their beliefs. Rowling is special because she is both a raving bigot, rich, and 100% willing to pour all her money into making sure no trans person feels safe again. You know, Morgoth's Trinity: Resources, Hatred, and Will to Power.
Part of the difference is Rowling still holds so much cultural weight (somehow). So many people still know and watch and purchase Harry Potter stuff. Seinfeld only really holds that weight amongst older conservatives. He's only popular amongst the people perpetuating the hate. Rowling's stuff is popular amongst those who should know better.
I do agree we should boycott more (I personally do boycott a fair bit), but comparing the current impact of Rowling to the current impact of Seinfeld is crazy.
Seinfeld (thankfully) doesn’t have a theme park
I dunno, the rise and fall and extreme mismanagement of a Seinfeld theme park would make for some great background documentaries for while I work...
Fuck it would be like 3 hours it would be so good
If only AI was real
What has he done horrible? Maybe we shouldn't support him either.
He claims Palestine doesn’t exist and that calls to free Palestine are akin to the KKK.
ok and I'm going to say you're indulging a cultural movement of transphobia
I'm barely aware it exists and almost never see anything about it.
Making a post called "Reminder: do not watch HBO's Harry Potter." Is literally marketing it and forcing people to think about it.
That's a fair point. But I'm not sure how to make a clear title without the keywords. Naming things is such a frustrating, imprecise art.
Do not think about pink elephants
We all just lost The Game.
Dang it, now I'm thinking about pink elephants? Why'd ya have to bring it up? /jk
Damnit
Meh, sail the seas and do what you want. This sounds like a plea from the corporate overlords to get you to not pirate their shit. Also, what show?
Oh dear, the thought police is here, telling me what I can pirate and what is forbidden.
I don't give a crap about Harry Potter and JK Rowling can go to hell along with all her trans hate, but your arguments and your authoritarian wording of the post are a bit ridiculous. You don't get to tell me what I am ethically allowed to do.
Authoritarianism is when someone suggests I don't support media made by a bigot who's trying to take away people's rights :---) I am very smart
You're right, except that I think expressing such an opinion here is futile. How anyone could possibly think this kind of post is a good use of their time and energy to make the world a better place is beyond me. Like maybe it's not harmful in the grand scheme of things, but if you want your society to be better and help people you care about moralizing in the echo chamber is just a ridiculous distraction.
Switzerland during WW2, defending their neutrality. I want my cake and I want to eat it too.
Worked for them too, came out better than everyone else. How nice for them
I don't have to deliberately collaborate with Nazis but I'll help them store their gold!
And get rich!
glad we're in mutual agreement on who you are!
Hobbylos. Blocked.
So let me get this straight, I’m supposed to abide by a clear set of rules, set by, who again!?
Also i disagree. You can enjoy something, completely guilt free, even if it was created by the biggest trologodyte known to man. Reading a book or watching a movie doesn’t equal wholesale support. Hell I think it would do the world a whole lot of good to read more books, even that are written or suggest ideas that we find offensive or repugnant. For it allows you knowledge, to listen, understand, and to form independent ideas and thought. Basically it creates a better source of knowledge and a defence against darknes. Versus just blindly listening to today’s serially offended internet warrior, who basically has almost zero to offer to humanity other than constant judgement and authoritarian like viewpoints from the opposite spectrum.
Fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me. I also won’t watch this show, but only because it looks terrible.
Goes to reply.
Sees username.
That's bait.gif
I feel like by this logic you shouldn't have even brought it up since they also track Internet engagement...
Marketing teams only track engagement on major social media, having a discussion about it on lemmy is not going to impact their metrics or even be considered
Have you work in marketing analysis before?
yep
That's a fair criticism. I'm gonna hope their scrapers aren't looking at Lemmy, but they probably are.
All scrapers look at Lemmy. When you search on google, Lemmy pops up in the results. You can't reasonably expect to be NOT scraped when you put things online.
Lemmy is well known by every major AI. It can even talk about the histories between various instances with some accuracy. Unless there’s some reason that commercial scraping companies would include Lemmy for an AI corpus but not include it for a marketing department’s research file, I’d say it’s safe to assume we’re included in that.
I'm just here to bring to your attention Lev Grossman's "The Magicians", both the books and the assorted TV show, which is quite awesome in its own right, even if it diverges from the books by quite a bit. There's a whole world of awesome outside of HP, and even if it wasn't, I refuse to recast in my theater of the mind the extremely talented and deeply regretted Alan Rickman and Dame Maggie Smith.
I'll add, the manga Witch Hat Atelier is a much better execution than Potter of the premise "a young orphan is abruptly brought over into a secretive world of mages overlapping with the mundane, but for mysterious reasons repeatedly draws the attention of dark forces."
I read the books as they came out and loved them. i tried watching the series as it was coming out but they really were so different from the books that when I had to wait for the next season I never picked it back up.
Are they worth watching though? If I go into it knowing it'll be basically something loosely related?
I think it's really good. The books... were frankly hard for me to get through. Not bad, but I only read the first few.
If you are going to watch the series, understand that the main cast are written as kind of assholes and are written like real people with real emotions and it's stupid, but stupid good. Also there is an SA scene that can honestly be skipped Season 1, Episode 13 running roughly from the 40:00 to 42:00 mark.
Once you get through the first season it's pretty smooth sailing through to the end of season 3. Then they have cancellation hanging over them so seasons 4 and 5 aren't quite as... grand as they should have been.
The Magicians show lost me with the sudden graphic rape, that was then portrayed a good thing. Sucks you got raped but you get a consolation prize of extra powerful magic! Also the rapist has magic semen, and they need to get more.
Look. You're not wrong that there is a really scary (I would perhaps say very intense and absolutely triggering, but not explicitly graphic. There's definitely graphic violence, but yeah.) scene with SA. But the god semen thing was a different deity and they gank the original trickster deity that did the SA.
When watching I do have the timestamps for that scene written down and do skip it. I skipped it when I introduced my wife to the show.
Not telling you what to do, but there is good content there. That's probably the single scene in the series I seriously tell people to avoid.
I'm sorry it upset you the way it did. And now I'm seriously feeling like typing this is not the right thing, but my tism brain wants to explain more and better.
It's all good, i enjoy a good explanation! I did mix those 2 up, I got farther in the series than I remembered. I had to go look it up and it's still bad. The way all of her remaining friends(because her friends were murdered before the rape) just brushed her off afterwards was unpleasant. She wanted justice and they didn't help her, so she went for it on her own. That messed up their plans and they were pissed in addition to being "concerned" she was turning dark. When they had originally abandoned her and looked down on her because of her lack of magic, now all of a sudden they "care". Quinten was such a shit friend. After all that, she chose to save them, by takeing a part her rapists to make her a goddess. Yeah, her whole arc was rage inducing. I tried to only watch what was necessary.
Yeah, I tried to get past it but there were a couple other plot lines that were fairly disturbing. The living ship, that also was SA somehow or something. Creepy Russian teacher watching them fuck as foxes. The magic system had a lot of tie ins with sex and it was ick. The guy who got stuck in the the past or something and lived a life that was erased. Idk it was just a lot.
Yep Harry Potter for adults
IMHO the onlyy ethical way to consume new HP media is original fanfics featuring LGTB+ characters. 😆
Harriet Porber the Trans Wizard comes to mind first. I love Chuck Tingle so much.
"Hi my name is Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Raven Way and I have long ebony black hair..."
As a compromise to not contribute to stat gathering could one not use newsgroups?
I don't see why not? It's direct download, which shouldn't be trackable
There is so much far better content out there to absorb other than Harry Potter. I can go without and be perfectly fine. I think we already have some of the books and DVDs from ages ago. So if my wife or I suddenly have the desire to revisit, we’re not consuming anything HBO or anyone else can even remotely trace.
Piracy subs where they tell you what to do?
I think youve missed the point of all this.
Dunno, the about mentions "ethical problems" and I think giving attention to a bigot personally funding anti-trans legislature not just at home but where she can reach constitutes as an "ethical problem."
You fully cant exist in modern society without ethical problems. You draw your own line.
If you're not giving money, and you're ensuring your plex-shared friends arent giving money, thats a valid enough degree of separation for many, potentially most.
The plex server is enough for me, too. HBO isn't going to be watching your Plex server, unless Plex is secretly selling all their users' data somehow. Can't imagine my high horse being that high lmfao
the thing you're being told not to do is to not be a transphobe. I feel like that's a reasonable request
Several steps removed here.
Restoftheowl material.
Agree 100%. I've been in some tough conversations with fellow LGBTQ+ allies over my participation, however minor, in the Harry Potter fandom. I'm seeing a lot of "it's fine if you liked it before we learned JKR was a bigot" but I'm also seeing a lot of people with the same story as mine — discovered the franchise back then, enjoyed it, but do not like what JKR is doing to the trans community — but also criticising me for the same. Like it's "fine" (to some extent?) if you're trans and JKR betrayed you, but if you're not trans, you're held to a higher standard as an ally. I dunno. It's confusing. I will not, however, back down from my claim that I enjoyed the first four (+HBP) books and the first four films before I learned she was crazy... and that this year I rewatched Philosopher's Stone in 4K (and yes, it holds up).
All that being said, the fears and concerns in the trans and LGBTQ+ community are valid. They may be jerks about it online, but as an ally, I can only ever strive to be a better one. I can't change what I liked in the past and I will not deny it, even to history revisers. But I can change what I do in the present, and I can always strive to Do Better.
I don't like the new Harry Potter series because of why it exists. JKR was disappointed the stars of the film series did not share her transphobic views, so she immediately made a point to recast Hermione and to make her completely different from Emma Watson's portrayal, as Watson was her most outspoken critic. She didn't make Hermione a Black girl to be inclusive, she did it to distance Watson from the character because Watson isn't transphobic. JKR further muddied the waters by saying that Dumbledore was gay and always had been (though no evidence of this is in the books — he's essentially treated as ace, as in, asexual, as in, his sexuality is undetermined and probably doesn't exist, which is fitting as the entirety of his character's relevance is mentorship to an adolescent boy). When the rest of the cast basically stood against her, she set out to recast all of them.
The new Harry Potter series looks like it might be fun, but I cannot in good conscience watch the new series. There are so many more things out there to see. Watching it with infinite time would be one thing, but I haven't got that, have I? I was fully grown when Philosopher's Stone came out, and I had no intention of seeing it. A coworker slipped me a bootleg copy (while it was still in cinemas!) and I watched it... twice. Then I went and saw it in cinema. I then collected the books and read them, and watched the movies, though I didn't like it after the fourth one. It stopped being fun. I'm currently reading Dungeon Crawler Carl, and by that I mean, of course, I'm listening to the audiobooks. I'm in the second to most current book, the seventh one, and it's still fun. It's gotten serious, but it's still fun. And, to the best of anyone's knowledge, Matt Dinniman (the author) and Jeff Hays (the audiobook narrator) are not bigots. That's the magical adventure series I'm looking forward to.
As a trans person, I have no idea why people are harping on you for liking HP before learning JKR was a bigot. As such, I never ascribe bigotry to people who simply purchase HP-related stuff. They may not know and may not be as online as I am to know the harm that they are contributing towards. However, if after they do find out, they continue to patronize said thing, I consider them as a bigot or at least that bigotry isn't a dealbreaker for them. I believe the saying is if you sit down at a table with 10 Nazis, there are 11 Nazis at the table.
To cap this off, though, I will paraphrase the idea of perfection being the enemy of progress.
Spot on. If you're okay with someone being racist, a bigot then that means at least you're cool with such bigotry being in our society. Which I see as a morale failing. Attention to such is still attention, kind of like there's no bad PR.
At this point it's only a matter of principle. JKR is a billionaire, her activism isn't limited by money. And most HP fans don't care or even know about her hateful views, so anything they put out will still make her millions.
I'll do what I want, thanks. :)
The trans people asking you to not materially support someone who is harming us at scale are not your mom telling you you're not allowed to play your video games, dude. You're perfectly allowed to be an asshole
materially support
piracy community
Demand of any sort is still bad. This is still giving attention to a bigot and her media. This isn't a high bar to clear at all, you can casually walk over it. But many people still seem intent on tripping over it.
Cause a pirate is free? :D
Fucking gross.
Wow. What a prick. It's difficult to imagine proudly declaring that you're transphobic in any setting, much less a piracy thread on Lemmy.
I think they were being sarcastic.
Edit: Mmmmm..... Thinking about maybe they weren't.
I initially thought they were being sarcastic too. Gross
A transphobe on a Lemmy instance, how """"fantastic"""".
Yes, I am Rotten to the core!
Nah just a turd.
Which is what?
What? Telling me what I can’t and can do? Or what I should or should not? In a piracy community at that.
I will consume specific media when, I want to. I will not consume it when, I don’t want to.
If your title was something like “I recommend not to”, that would’ve been a different discussion.
EDIT:
With all the obnoxious comments, I will definitely watch the new HBO franchise. Out of spite and because I for one like the Harry Potter franchise. It will be available to watch around 25 December of this year.
This whole thread also proved me once again that Lemmy is just Reddit 2.0. You do not agree with the echo chamber and hive mind? You are bad! Never realizing that the entire attitude with that will never work to make someone agree with your statement, it will just make them more against your statement.
and because I for one like the Harry Potter franchise.
Really burying the lead there lmao
"Noooooo I need to consoooooom! Give me my treats! How dare you say I shouldn't have them!"
Another Hexbear person comment. Really shows the attitude of the community, lol!
Never realizing that the entire attitude with that will never work to make someone agree with your statement, it will just make them more against your statement.
Not everyone’s politics are based on reactionary spite
With all the obnoxious comments, I will definitely watch the new HBO franchise. Out of spite and because I for one like the Harry Potter franchise.
but about treats and trans people
you are an actual child and you don't deserve people politely recommending action to you. You should be commanded since you don't know how to think to yourself. You just said you're going to consume transphobic media made for children and baby-brained adults out of pure spite. You were given a reason not to indulge in it, because even pirating it is signalling to corporations that transphobic media is acceptable.
and you then gleefully don't even mention why you're being told not to indulge in it: because JK Rowling isn't just some lady with an opinion, she's a billionaire directly funding discrimination against me and people like me. Yes, you're bad if you're a transphobe. Fuck you. I hope you're against me because I don't want to be on the same side as a baby-brained infant bigot like you.
Ok, lol.
On next week's episode: idiot actually becomes a Nazi because people told him not to, despite all of the good reasons to heed their words
“Reminder: do not smear shit on the walls”
“Uhm, are you seriously telling me what to do right now? Maybe next time say you recommend I not smear shit on the walls”
It's okay, you do not like my response to OP. Everyone has their own opinion, that’s fine, right? Or is it only okay when people agree with your opinion? Ah, never mind. Next time, I will just write what OP and the echo chamber wants to read, gain all the upvotes and then still do what I want. That’s how the internet likes it.
Don’t worry, your ability to consume treats thoughtlessly is more important than not causing harm. But that’s just my opinion
Yeah, lets boycott Harry Potter. Exactly like the boycott that happened with the game couple of years ago, that will bring a dent!
This a piracy community, all about doing pirating what you want. The fact people here trying to preach you should not and “you must listen or else you are bad” is just.. ironic. A piracy community…
Don’t worry though, your amazing preach will force people to listen to you or.. You might believe that.
You see, I have never heard of the new HBO stuff until OP mentioned it. Now I’m curious about it, I like Harry Potter franchise since I was a kid and that will never change. No matter how “morally correct” the internet tries to be.
Don’t worry though, your preaching and trying to be sarcastic meanwhile other people trying to force other internet users to “not watch it”, sure will work!
Oh no say it ain’t so my preaching has forced your hand!
Quite much proved my point, thank you. Your attitude is one of exact reasons people refuse to listen you and will definitely continue to watch whatever you don’t want them to watch. Anyway, was fun! See you, enjoy your day, perhaps watch the new HBO Harry Potter stuff.
I failed in the free marketplace of ideas this day 😔
Baby mentality
That is entirely okay; I see the toxicity of Reddit has increased within Lemmy: "You do not agree with me, so you are a bad person.". I appreciate the demonstration of your attitude. However, I'm not fond of it and therefore will simply use the infinite block feature that is within Lemmy.
Your attitude will not and never will make people change their mindset or think about their own decisions. It will just make people dig their heels in the ground and continue to go against the exact thing you are trying to preach.
This post pretty much proves that Lemmy is and can be just as toxic an environment as Reddit.
the thing you're not agreeing with is "transphobia is bad" in which case yes, that makes you a bad person. Don't dance around this, dipshit
No, it is more “hurr durr; I will insult you merely because you are going to watch a series” and “Despite being a pirate you must not watch this!” Or “I hate authoritarian behavior, so lets behave that way myself!”
I also have noticed, the lot of you, Hexbear community are the ones being so.. yep. Lol.
However, if I like to dance, I will dance.
Describes people they perceive are being redditors
Does it in the most reddit edge lord way possible
Good job
Good job
Thank you! Appreciate it.
I'm insulting you based on the insult you deserve: smug transphobic dimwit. You're dismissing that we're telling you it's not simply watching a series, you're consuming media made by a machine designed to kill trans people. I personally don't even care if you watch it, but you're acting so obstinate in the face of actual trans people that it speaks poorly upon your character, to the point you deserve insults like: bigoted nazi shithead.
"I'm going to be a transphobe out of spite" is a really weird hill to die on
Pretending that someone is a “transphobe” or a “nazi” when watching something like a series. That’s.. okay. There’s no reason to debate, lol. The more comments, I see. The more it just makes me think “yep, Lemmy is just Reddit. Just a different platform”.
Call everyone a transphobe that watches something that goes against your own opinion. Yep.
Call me whatever you want, it won’t change my position. Especially since you can’t debate without insulting. I’ll just “dig my heels more into the ground”.
“I don’t like what the right/ far right is doing to minorities. Authoritarian and fascism behavior. So let me just behave authoritatively too and tell people what to do, think and like. If they don’t, then they are bad”. Similarities? Maybe… But don’t write that, that’s bad.
To me, it's pretty clear cut. Supporting a transphobe makes you a transphobe. I obviously can't control your actions, but it is interesting that you feel the need to defend a position that allows you to support a transphobe.
I'm glad you said this because I tried to word my post in a way that did not include or suggest this phrase, and I see now that trying to be diplomatic to transphobes may have been a mistake. But I still hope I changed some minds.
How am I defending someone when I’m pirating it? Money does not flow to the person.
I’m not defending my position, I’m just surprised on how authoritively the left sudden get while blaming the right for being authoritarian. Especially in a Piracy community, where people pirate and download whatever they want without caring about.. authority or opinions most of the time.
Then people get all squishy, emotionally and insult. Yeah, that will help the statement someone is trying to make.
Honestly, I don’t even care anymore. I’ll watch what I want to watch. The internet gives me a internet-headache lol. Reddit, Lemmy, whatever platform all the same crap with a different name.
Want to call me slurs or hateful names? Go ahead, you are a stranger on the internet.
Haven't used insults or slurs, but if you'd like to imagine some for your emotional security, feel free. If one line from a stranger on the internet is enough to make you watch a subpar show made by a transphobe you weren't going to watch, I don't know how much "anti-authority" you can pretend to be.
You do you, man. Stay agitated on the internet. I’ll watch and enjoy content that I like, lol.
I doubt I'll watch it, still gonna download it and put on my media server regardless. Other people will want to watch it so it's better they watch it pirated on plex than on an official stream.
Harm reduction ftw
I wouldn't watch it anyways, I got tired of Harry Potter in the early 2000s.
There’s a bunch of flaws in your logic here, not the least of which is:
There is no ethical Harry Potter consumption within capitalism.
Piracy isn’t capitalism
Edit: let me be more clear--
You're trying to resolve one ethical dilemma with another unresolved ethical dilemma: You're trying to resolve: "Can one appreciate an artist's work while acknowledging that the artist is detestable?" with the same logic as "Is digital piracy an ethical workaround to media capitalism?" and combine the two arguments into one solution: "Is it ethical to pirate Harry Potter media from HBO, even though I find both Rowling, HBO, and capitalism detestable?"
It's like asking, "As a strict environmentalist, is it ethical to drive my EV to the market if I know I had to charge it from an energy grid powered by coal plant (that I had no choice but to use)?" Because no matter how much personal opinion and moral relativism enters the ethical calculus, there's a logical breakdown at the crosspoint of systemics, when individual participation merges into participation at scale, how much your choice is actually a choice at all, how much your choice would make any difference, and on and on...
but before all of that, it doesn't make any logical sense to even go down that path since trying to resolve one ethical dilemma with another - especially expecting a black-and-white answer - is just a bit silly.
But privacy doesn't cancel capitalism. HBO doesn't need to know who downloaded, just how much people downloaded.
Capitalism is going to happen regardless of piracy. HBO is going to make the show regardless of how many people pirate it.
HBO doesn't need to know who downloaded, just how much people downloaded.
They don’t need to know either of those things
But privacy [sic] doesn't cancel capitalism.
It kinda does, but that’s not really the point
Piracy is in a sense the purest form of capitalism. It costs slightly more than nothing to send a file over the internet, and so if the efficient market hypothesis was true everyone would be pirating all the time. The suits and the corpos know full well that their products compete with piracy's offerings at the low, low price of free + a VPN or Usenet subscription or a 3D printer. The smarter corpos know that they can gague a market by keeping track of torrents of their movies/shows. We aren't insulated from the free market down here just because we don't pay for shit.
Piracy is anti-capitalism. And while it may cost you something to send a file over the Internet, it doesn’t necessarily cost me anything. And if capitalism is producing something and selling it for a profit, piracy is the opposite of that: taking a copy for free, regardless of the method. Thus: anti-capitalism
Just because of the method of piracy you happen to choose may cost you money doesn’t change those underlying facts. especially because it is perfectly possible to engage in piracy without engaging in capitalism whatsoever. just because in the example you have cited, you have chosen to commingle the two does not mean they cannot be mutually exclusive.
I think you are equating capitalism to money changing hands instead of the generation of capital. The glib version of my argument is "Piracy drives word-of-mouth advertisement which drives sales, therefore piracy increases sales." Its obviously more complex than that, but I hope you see my position.
I don’t see the difference between the two things you just described, no… except for the circuitousness of the path of the profit/value generation. The end result is the same.
But the argument you’re making also makes a huge amount of assumptions about the individual versus about engagement in piracy by society in general. On the micro scale versus the macro scale. Is piracy of a particular piece of media ethical as an individual versus is piracy of a particular piece of media ethical at scale. The crux of your argument seems to be the value generation of “word-of-mouth“. So now you’re just arguing a matter of degrees and pedagogy.
So you’re not really arguing about capitalism or piracy at all, now you’re arguing about passing undeserved value, and the methods by which that is done and how piracy is being co-opted via capitalism.
And what this whole argument really is about is whether or not you can separate the art from the artist and still appreciate a piece of work, even though you find the artist repulsive. And none of this has to do with piracy at all, but whether you can find a way to consume an artist work without endorsing the artist. where piracy comes into the conversation is whether or not that is an acceptable means to that end, and people will always disagree on that.
The whole “capitalism” chestnut isn’t a means to untangle that because piracy is, as I’ve said, mostly anti-capitalism, and isn’t self reliant on capitalism, so the logic of that argument doesn’t really work out. It’s mostly down to personal opinion, and there really isn’t any logic to that at all.
My man, the reason I said that is I'm giving you an out. Direct downloads can't be tracked in the way that streams and torrents can. Get a Google Drive link from somebody or get a Usenet subscription. I thought I was clear that I meant "within capitalism" as "everything the suits can measure and react to".
Not only is what you said definitely not true for a lot of different reasons, but if you’re gonna be this condescending, I don’t see why I should continue having a conversation with you.
I don't think the cached file other people cached on premiumize.me or other debrid services can be tracked but I'd love to know how I'm wrong. Out of curiosity to be clear, I'm not watching Harry Potter.
Direct downloads can't be tracked in the way torrents can, as far as I know.
I didn’t say it could. In fact, I really hope it can’t, lol.
Yes, and also it would just be disgusting to me to even have to think about that terf in any way. Plus it's incredibly terminally lib.
I have a set of the books from the time of release. Strangely, I’ve never read the last one.
If you’re curious regarding the details, ContraPoints has a long form vid on the issue.
You're not missing much. By the time the last ones came out, most fans had aged out of the target demographic.
Fuckin A, Misfits!
Firstly, I abhor rowling.
However, I don't agree that piracy demonstrates potential earnings to producers.
Eh, I remember when HBO proudly touted that game of thrones was the top pirated show. Idk why they cared, but they did.
I think that considering the federal bill in the US currently aimed at forcing ISPs and VPN providers to block foreign piracy websites that copyright holders absolutely see piracy as an untapped market. Even if their plan is to ban their competition rather than change their business practices in a way that would attract those customers
Thanks for the heads up. I don't even like Harry Potter and JK Rowling can get fucked for being an out of touch billionaire but I'm gonna find these torrents and seed the shit outta them. If you want to tell people what to do and how to think, you're probably in the wrong place.
Side note: Let's be real dude; comparing her to Trump, MAGA, Disney, or Nestle is insane and just makes you sound delusional.
comparing her to Trump, MAGA,
https://www.advocate.com/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-organization
She literally donates money to anti-trans organizations who have the explicitly stated purpose of harming trans people as their only objective. Yes, she is comparable to MAGA freaks harassing drag shows.
My comment had nothing to do with trans folks - JK Rowling is a shit ass person, I don't disagree with that at all. However, I take offense to the policing of information. I believe that non-harmful human art, media, and general knowledge should be preserved. Hell, I'm seeding about 6TB for Anna's Archive at the moment.
Can you just do us a favor and chill out on the seeding until either the TV show isn't in production or Rowling is dead? Or just posting it on Usenet, even. My high horse is not that high.
Another potential ally down the drain. You had so much promise. I am now sad 😔 What are we doing here folks?!!!!
There are many far worse things people support, directly with their money. Singling out Harry Potter due to the creator's outspokenness, while honorably motivated, is short-sighted and feels kind of childish.
Like "Oh no, my favorite blorbo was a bad blorbo!"
If this is what you have the energy to make a stand on regarding your principles, that's great. Every bit does help. It just seems dumb to put this much effort into standing against this when there's so much more and bigger to stand against. Plus, there's additional weird from moralizing in a piracy community.
It just seems dumb to put this much effort into standing against this when there’s so much more and bigger to stand against.
Why is this a trade off, in your eyes? Why can't people do both, and why does not watching something count as effort when there's more media out there right now than we could watch in our lifetimes?
The problem is that social media algorithms thrive on engagement, and the fastest way to further that engagement is hate. Spending all day on the internet banging on about various fashionable causes, may make give a temporary endorphin boost, but does it actually change much except social media corps' profit margins?
OP has posted a reminder to not watch Harry Potter in a small internet forum for internet piracy. Will this affect JKR's support of anti-trans groups in any discernible way?
If you want to change the world, it's arguably better to get off the internet, and spend time in your community making real tangible changes. If you spend too much time on the internet, it's likely you'll forsake the former. There are only so many hours in the day.
It's fundamentally not that different to replacing real social interaction, with ersatz social interaction on social media.
e: To be clear, this comment won't actually change anything either. I am just filling time.
The problem is that social media algorithms thrive on engagement, and the fastest way to further that engagement is hate.
Not to worry, though! The last internet-organised boycott of a Harry Potter product went really well and...oh...
Bigots gonna bigot.
I get where you're coming from, but my stance is less of a "this person is loudly bad" like Orson Scott Card and more based on the fact that she is actively pouring millions of dollars into making the world worse for trans people. If she wasn't a billionaire from a property she personally owns, I wouldn't care. There's lots of rabidly bigoted millionaires and billionaires who get their money from inherited assets and the stock market, and we can't do anything to affect them. I'm not going to pull out my soapbox to protest Nestlé, there's not much I can do other than try to avoid their products and I know that isn't going to change them at all.
Better comparison is AI. Every time you use an AI for any reason, trace amounts of heavy metals end up in someone's drinking water source directly because of you, and the company can use your query to justify their value to shareholders. Very few things are actually black-and-white like this. Like, one bag of Purina Dog Chow does not equal Nestlé tormenting one African child laborer. With Rowling, that correlation absolutely exists. I will not judge you or anyone else for buying Orson Scott Card's work, he doesn't have the capital to fund hate crimes even if he absolutely would love to. Disney has the money to do what Rowling does but refuses to becasue it is bad optics. Rowling is the only person whose ability to fund hate crimes equals her hate.
Grow up.
