this post was submitted on 16 May 2025
2623 points (99.1% liked)

pics

19745 readers
514 users here now

Rules:

1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer

2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.

3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.

4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.

5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.

Photo of the Week Rule(s):

1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.

2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.

Weeks 2023

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Martin believes everyone should have access to free quality software.

Thanks so muchπŸ™

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Also shouting out Krita as a Photoshop alternative for digital painting, digital art.

https://krita.org/en/

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

How is its CMYK profiles in your opinion?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

So the website is super summy, finally found the "real" download button which took me to the MS app store. Ok fine, but now its been 10 minutes and it actually hasn't started downloading yet...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you sure you are at https://inkscape.org/ ?

Last time I downloaded it ~1 year ago I don't remember any hoops I had to jump through.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Can confirm, your link worked great, was able to directly download the installer. Thank you!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Inkscape is good but it can't replace illustrator, especially for the needs of someone willing to pay $1000/year for it

Maybe the affinity suite is more appropriate (ROI in just 2 months of adobe subscription)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago

People like him are why I still have hope in tech. May the machine bless him eternally.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

It seems just fitting that he wears a hat that you need bezier curves to draw perfectly with vector graphics!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Thank you Martin and Inkscape-team!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Lost dollars because of free software and lost dollars because of piracy are both imaginary numbers.

[–] [email protected] 69 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You don't lose money when people use a competitors service/product over yours. That money wasn't yours to lose.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yet, the companies cry about losing money due to online piracy. At this point it's eΕΊtremally funny

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

for me, anyway, they didn't lose money because if i couldn't pirate it, I just wouldn't watch. I'm told this is a common thought process

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

"If I couldn't easily grab it off the table and walk away with it ,I wouldn't have stolen it."

Screw the media companies for the price gouging and being general dicks dragging people through the courts, but it's still knowingly working around and accessing content that someone else paid to create. I dunno why people can't be honest "I did it because it was easy and the chances of being caught were nominal. The risk / reward was in my favour".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your gonna get down votes and people crying about how words can mean anything, but entirely true. Risk/reward is 99% of it. Its also socially acceptable to talk about owning pirated media, which reduces the risk.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago

Of course it is and you're also not physically going somewhere to steal the content it's just ones and zeros that are landing on your storage device.

I can certainly agree with the argument that the content owners create an environment that makes piracy more likely to occur, but they are just making a judgement that current subscribers will keep paying higher fees and that some piracy will occur from those that won't pay.

But those that do pirate making out that have moral justification for doing so is bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

it's not theft if you can't legally own it. They willingly change the TOS to say that you're basically renting it, and they can take it away for any reason, at any time. If they can take away something I paid money for, it's not wrong to pirate it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's a different argument though. If you have paid for a license to the content and they remove the distribution method or kill the drm that allows access to it. I'd say it's fair game that you find an "alternative" copy of the content or work around to keep access to what you paid for. Unless you are knowingly buying it on a 1 off rental basis.

Don't get me wrong, the current system is not weighted in the consumers favour at all and it's a good reason to not play the game and avoid netflix, buy drm free computer games, etc but I just object to the argument the people who pirate are somehow noble robinhoods in a legally sound position. You're still knowingly accessing something that someone paid to create and you're gaining a benefit from that in entertainment. You're just finding a way to justify doing so that sits right with your own moral code.

If everyone pirated, the entertainment industry would cease to exist or at least be greatly reduced the remaining people would only be doing it as a hobby. Big budget moves and TV series, AAA computer games would no longer find funding if no one at the consumer end is paying for it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're still knowingly accessing something that someone paid to create and you're gaining a benefit from that in entertainment.

And how do you feel about adblockers? By using one you're depriving sites of the ad revenue they'd gain off of you reading their article or watching their video, etc. Do you use one or are you raw dogging the internet so that the content servers can harvest your data which they sell to serve you targeted ads?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

I use a pihole.

What I won't do is write a diatribe about how what I am doing isn't going to deprive websites of a ad impression or that the websites deserve it because of how many ads whey paste across their site. I do it because it's simple for me to setup on my network I have control of and it makes my browsing expriance better, I fully accept that if everyone acted like me then most websites will end up behind a full paywall.

Its people who pretend what they are doing is justified and moral over just being easy to do with nominal risk to themselves. Just own it bro, that's all I ask. You do it because you can, it's easy and you're unlikely to get caught.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

I feel like, in the long run, this is going to be a good thing.

Hopefully:
Consumers will realise the problems with streaming platforms and those who pirate will realise the importance of supporting the studios they like.
Then there will be less people using the streaming services and more people buying copies directly from the studio.

All that remains is studios using a service that P2Ps directly to the customer's computer, bypassing all the wasted Blu-ray plastics.
I am going to, once again, give the example of Steam game soundtracks, which I can keep wherever I want and listen to, using whichever software I want.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not to mention, it's not theft because the original is still intact.

If I go steal a car, I'm taking the physical item and depriving the owner of said item.

If I download a movie, the movie is still there, it has been copied at best, not "stolen."

It's like watching a baseball game from the fence, sure you didn't pay for the ticket, but you're not occupying a seat so that someone else can't pay to use it.

If I download a movie, it doesn't take it off netflix so nobody else can enjoy it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Okay so its forgery? Who gives a fuck, its all a type of stealing shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not the gotcha you think it is. They said competitors, piracy makes them use your own product and not pay you for it.

Would a kid buy photoshop if they had to? Probably not. Would a sketchy company? Yup.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Completely irrellevant to the discussion and nice ragebait, but whatever.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I don't see how it is. A kid that can't afford to buy photoshop won't buy it any more than a sketchy company would, just like how facebook much rather steal material than pay their way for it. The difference obviously being that the sketch company might very well have the capital to pay their way, they're just used to get away with it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

The point you are missing is the "had to".

The sketchy company didn't have to pay the creators for it because it was available via different means.
They would have had to, if they couldn't find it otherwise.

Of course, in that case, they would have "borrowed" it from libraries and such, but then again, the premise is that they had to, which is not being fulfilled in your example.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

Tell that to all of the monopolies that have totally captured a market segment.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί