Hacker News Reader

Comment by jquery | Hacker News Reader

I don't think this question is asked in good faith, but I'll try to respond anyway. The answer is we don't live in a perfect world, and we all have to make pragmatic choices. If there was an alternative to petroleum that involved painlessly breaking a wrongheaded law, I would do it in a heartbeat. Choosing to pirate Game of Thrones is a win/win. I get the content I want and I don't enrich cable executives who not only try to monopolize local municipalities and fight progress, but who are striking at the heart of the internet itself with crap like SOPA.

View on HN

How does your action result in a win for the thousands of people (actors, extras, film crew, set construction crew, costume designers, editors, sound engineers, musicians, etc.) who worked on Game of Thrones? If everyone followed your lead and nobody paid a cent to HBO they would all be out of a job. It's only because others are willing to reward the creators for their work that your freeloading is possible.

It doesn't. But the alternative, not watching the show, doesn't either. He also never claims that his actions would benefit anybody. (You probably have the moral high ground here, I just don't agree with this argument.)

The issue is with calling it win/win:

  > Choosing to pirate Game of Thrones is a win/win. I get
  > the content I want and I don't enrich cable executives

Both wins are wins for the pirate with no consideration to others. This is a parasite's definition of win/win.

This parasite would be happy to give HBO money. HBO doesn't want it. Not my problem.

We are in agreement that HBO's business choices aren't your problem. That's a non sequitur. I'm talking about your actions, not HBO's.

If everyone followed my lead, HBO-Go would be available standalone. Today. Not ten years from now after they've had their fill of dumb money. They're greedy, not stupid.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com