What's new
By:
Filters

Youtube TV

green said:
How are the actors hypocrites? Because they made money from "the man" and want to help less powerful people (ie, minimum wage earners) have opportunities to make more money?

That makes no sense.

Why are you asking them to take pay cuts but then are for corporate welfare and tax cuts and cutting welfare?

That's hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

the man makes 200.000.000
actor a makes 20 million
actor b makes 10 million
light technician guy makes 40.000 a year
chef cooking dinner for actor makes 25.000 a year!


actor a and b lecture me about income inequeality! meeanwhile they have more income inequality in their industry than in mine.


they should lead by example and take their salary and bgive some of their money light technician and the cheff. so their is less income inequality.

but no they buy 10-12 15 houses(which i think is ok, if you can afford it) but then dont lecture me on how we should help refugees. they can house more refugees in their houses than i can in mine.
if you are gonna lecture me, LEAD BY EXAMPLE!
 
green said:
It's pretty simple. If you use something and aren't paying for it...you probably shouldn't be going to the temple.
Click to expand...
I have a serious question.
Is using pandora illegal or wrong? I don't pay for pandora.
How about when I listen to the radio? I don't pay for that either.

(This question isn't just for you btw, just a general question)
 
fishonjazz said:
I have a serious question.
Is using pandora illegal or wrong? I don't pay for pandora.
How about when I listen to the radio? I don't pay for that either.

(This question isn't just for you btw, just a general question)
Click to expand...

as far as i know radio is paid for by advertisers. so it is "free", it is basically socialism someone else pays for your pleasure :D

nothing wrong with that kinda socialism when the person who pays does it freely.

but others might disagree
 
DutchJazzer said:
as far as i know radio is paid for by advertisers. so it is "free", it is basically socialism someone else pays for your pleasure :D

nothing wrong with that kinda socialism when the person who pays does it freely.

but others might disagree
Click to expand...

It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)
 
b_line said:
It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)
Click to expand...

dont get your panties all up in a bunch man.

to me it is socialism, because i never buy stuff because i heard commercial on radio!

and you are right in essence it is not socialism. socialism is way worse.


sorry to offend ya bro!
 
DutchJazzer said:
dont get your panties all up in a bunch man.

to me it is socialism, because i never buy stuff because i heard commercial on radio!

and you are right in essence it is not socialism. socialism is way worse.


sorry to offend ya bro!
Click to expand...

Radio waves are socialism though, because they are maintained by the government, and licensed by the FCC. At least in the US they are. You should stop using radio or internet if you are that opposed to socialism.
 
b_line said:
It's not socialism because it is advertising, so someone is paying for it on the market. The part that is socialism is that you use the internet to listen to it, which is maintained by governments in most cases, so that part is a social good. (Not a good in the positive sense, a good in the sense that it is a commodity.)
Click to expand...

Socialism does not mean " stuff the government does". Let's refrain from using Breitbart's definition of socialism.
 
The free apps I use to watch movies and tv have adds (I'm sick of seeing a particular old spice add all the time) just like the radio and pandora so does that mean it's not stealing?

How about if my neighbor is playing a cd outside really loud that I like and rather than buying the cd I just listen to his?

What about if I watch tons of youtube music videos rather than paying to download the music or buy the cd's?
 
DutchJazzer said:
the man makes 200.000.000
actor a makes 20 million
actor b makes 10 million
light technician guy makes 40.000 a year
chef cooking dinner for actor makes 25.000 a year!


actor a and b lecture me about income inequeality! meeanwhile they have more income inequality in their industry than in mine.


they should lead by example and take their salary and bgive some of their money light technician and the cheff. so their is less income inequality.

but no they buy 10-12 15 houses(which i think is ok, if you can afford it) but then dont lecture me on how we should help refugees. they can house more refugees in their houses than i can in mine.
if you are gonna lecture me, LEAD BY EXAMPLE!
Click to expand...

So, by your logic, no one should ever preach about refugees, right? Just go get yours and screw everyone else?

Or, are you mad that those people have a talent that a lighting technician doesn't have? Do you feel that we should all be adopting socialist ways, and even though Brad Pitt or Matt Damon can do things that I can't, they should not be rewarded for their talents and abilities, should make a standard cut, and the guy who holds the lights, a job almost anyone can do, should make a much similar wage?

If that's the case, why aren't we raising the minimum wage? Shouldn't that be prime objective number one for you?

And if so, then...whoa...YOU AGREE WITH THOSE YOU HATE. Whoa. Heavy man.
 
fishonjazz said:
I have a serious question.
Is using pandora illegal or wrong? I don't pay for pandora.
How about when I listen to the radio? I don't pay for that either.

(This question isn't just for you btw, just a general question)
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't know about Pandora as I've never used it. I have the $15 monthly plan through Apple that I use.

I'd assume you still hear ads though.
 
fishonjazz said:
The free apps I use to watch movies and tv have adds (I'm sick of seeing a particular old spice add all the time) just like the radio and pandora so does that mean it's not stealing?

How about if my neighbor is playing a cd outside really loud that I like and rather than buying the cd I just listen to his?

What about if I watch tons of youtube music videos rather than paying to download the music or buy the cd's?
Click to expand...

Look at you getting all technical with me. lol. I don't know about your apps. BUT, after seeing all the lawsuits with that LDS place that was editing movies, I wonder if your apps have legal rights to show the movies/shows. If they do, then you are fine. If they are stealing them, then technically, you are stealing them as well.

If your neighbor is not making money off his CD, then you are fine. Under the agreement he agrees to, he can play his CD but not make any money off it. If make a deal with him, where he plays his CD loudly every day at 5pm and you pay him, technically you'd be stealing.

Same with youtube. You watch the ads, and by watching the ads, that is how you "pay" for the privilege of listening to the artwork.
 
green said:
Look at you getting all technical with me. lol. I don't know about your apps. BUT, after seeing all the lawsuits with that LDS place that was editing movies, I wonder if your apps have legal rights to show the movies/shows. If they do, then you are fine. If they are stealing them, then technically, you are stealing them as well.

If your neighbor is not making money off his CD, then you are fine. Under the agreement he agrees to, he can play his CD but not make any money off it. If make a deal with him, where he plays his CD loudly every day at 5pm and you pay him, technically you'd be stealing.

Same with youtube. You watch the ads, and by watching the ads, that is how you "pay" for the privilege of listening to the artwork.
Click to expand...
Good response.
 
fishonjazz said:
Good response.
Click to expand...

but if you use addblock on youtube, whats up with that. is it still immoral

i admit i use addblock, because sometimes there are commercials with sound! and the sound gets loud. for example i woke up my fiance a few times back in the day when watching jazz game while browsing the web and suddenly an ad with sounds pops up very LOUDLY.

so yeah thats the only reason i use addblock. but i donate to certain youtube channels i watch often
 
It really comes down to whatever agreement the owners of the intellectual property have made in regard to distribution, sales, broadcast, etc. The owners of the content make decisions on how that content can be used and what form of compensation they receive.

There are standards that apply in general terms, like playing a CD. You can listen to your CDs and you can listen to them with friends, family, whatever. You can also lend your CDs to your buddy. But if you are charging admission to your house so that people can listen you might be violating the terms of use. If you are making copies and selling them you are violating the terms of use. If you are making a copy and providing it over a file sharing app you are violating terms of use.

But I'm not trying to act all morally superior here. If societal standards are that watching new release movies for free on your phone is okay and you won't be judged for talking about it in polite company then that's the standard. 99% of people are going to go along with the standards as established.

I just wonder why this particular thing has been deemed okay. That's all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top