Technology

Worse, the harder they try to stop it, the shittier the experience gets for their paying customers, but not for the pirates really. At that point, why would anyone want to pay for a crappy experience being treated like a thief when you can save your money and actually be a "thief" (at least in their eyes) while being treated like a paying customer?

+1 for steam

I used to pirate my games on linux, but it's harder than on Windows. Steam's gaming on linux experience is perfect, just download the game and hit Play.

I agree, but most games also have a higher ratio of value to cost. If I buy a game for 50 bucks, I'll play it for many hours, let's say 50. So that will be 1 per hour, pretty good. If I buy a new movie, that isn't available for subscription streaming, that ratio is easily double. If I have a subscription and need another now, that also lowers it's value. It also comes with lower comfort and ease of consumption, as you mentioned.

Another great example is YouTube premium. I'll gladly pay 5 or 7 bucks for adfree content, not 14 though. I don't need YouTube music. So I block ads where I can and donate to creators, if I can afford it. They could have had my money, but they are, simply, greedy.

I also hate it, when deals are altered without my consent. It makes me feel like a sucker, and therefore makes it less likely for me to keep investing.

I used to pirate movies I owned just because of the annoying FBI warnings and ads at the start of dvds.

My story but with anime. Japan has some really annoying laws requiring their shows to be blurred and dimmed during fast-paced scenes and it absolutely butchers the height of good animations.

The Blu-ray releases don't have this issue, but guess what releases aren't available for purchase/streaming for English audiences. 🫠 I want to give them money so bad, but 🤷‍♀️

I still keep the pirated have DRMless copies of games I bought on Steam though - just for ownership.

Piracy is a service problem.

Yes but also it is increasingly becoming a price problem

Netflix did, but now online streaming is fragmented and it's worse again.

Let's Play Wack-A-Mole! Select Game:

1. Sue Hosters -> Found New Hosts
2. Sue Domains -> Found New Domains
3. Sue DNS -> Found New DNS
4. ????

Funks your brother check it out now.

Or run your own recursive DNS which can be done in a docker container. Most people I know sailing the seven seas are quite adept at technology. Well most people I know are in IT in the first place so that likely doesn’t mean much.

How about not poisoning anything? Not using powers is also an option.

Nothing for people who know what DNS is. They're targeting the people who don't.

As long as you’re not using DNSSEC, you can easily run your own. I’ve been running a PiHole for years now, it can pull in block lists and such from various sources, it’d be fairly easy to add a list to pull in automatically that include extra records. Those could be served from anywhere. Torrents, git repos, http calls, etc.

unbound is a validating, recursive, caching, self-hosted DNS resolver.

There's the completely decentralized ENS name system that would bypass this censorship entirely.

But unfortunately it's got the scarlet letters "NFT" hanging around its neck, and so good luck trying to discuss its actual merits or try to implement support for it anywhere.

There exists GNUNet, but not really sure how common it is used.

I don't think this question really makes sense.

DNS is centralized in that there is a root zone that determines who is the canonical authority for each top level domain like .com or .world (and the registrar for each top level domain controls who controls each domain under them). But it's also decentralized in the sense that everyone who controls a domain can assign any subdomains below that, and that anyone can choose to override the name resolving with their own local DNS server (or even a hosts file saved on the device).

The court case here is trying to override the official domain ownership records at specific DNS providers. The problem is that the intermediaries are being ordered by the courts not to follow the central authority.

Federation wouldn't fit this model: we still want DNS to be canonical where everyone in the world agrees which domain resolves to which IP addresses.

Yes, it's called unbound

It is legal just only because they can restrict the access to any of the services they want, in fact they don't oblige you to use their DNS...