Depending on what you're doing, you should consider writing your own framework. I love using the one I wrote from scratch 10+ years ago: it's proven, high quality code, there are no secret corners I don't understand, and I know how to fix or modify it to do new things. It's also small and fast because it only needs to solve the problems *I* encounter.
To anyone who starts preaching the religion of code reuse, I think you're just scared of the unknown
This is a challenging option in a corporate environment when you need to hire someone to support said framework after you have left the company unexpectedly.
A touching story about focusing one what matters in life from the point of view of a nerdy geek with months to live.
Individual creators don't really stand to gain much by stopping piracy. It's mostly the entities to whom the creations are transferred to, meaning individuals are (typically) benefited indirectly at best.
1. This is a choice (albeit usually a steady income is chosen over trying to market and distribute material yourself.
2. I wouldn't marginalize the indirect benefit. Actors still get paid well.
our society, for the longest time, did *not* put a price tag on culture. Music, knowledge, the arts
That may be true. But piracy is not just culture items. What about software? As a software engineer it would be nice to create an Android app and sell it and not have to worry about one person buying it and then everyone else getting it for free. I deserve (maybe) more than 99 cents for the effort I put into creating the game. I agree with patent reform (the current state of software patents makes me more scared to create that Android game than piracy) and reducing copy-write limitations (great video about the history of it). 28 years is plenty for me. If people still want to buy version 1.0 of my software after 28 years, then the masses can have it!
ps. I appreciate your time in having this constructive debate.
Stopping piracy is not evil.
Maybe it is. I don't have the philosophical finesse right now to think of a way to support the statement "Stopping piracy is evil", but I imagine a somewhat convincing case could be made for it. In any event, "stopping piracy" should not be immediately and universally recognized as a Good Thing.
I'm not philosopher, but one of the reasons our society works is that there is general agreement that we own the product of our labors. In many cases we transfer that ownership to our employers for exchange of a steady income. If piracy were widespread and accepted, there would be many talented folks who would not expend the effort to create software, music, movies, etc. because they would get nothing tangible in return.
You could argue that we should all work for the good of society as a whole, but in the real world communism doesn't work. The important thing to do is find a balance between capitalism and individual rights. The creator should have the choice of whether they want to give it to everyone or charge 99 cents on then Android market. When it comes to stopping piracy I don't understand how anyone can be against creators having ownership and control over their creations.
Lesser evil does not make evil good. If it bears any resemblance to SOPA it's just as evil.
Stopping piracy is not evil. But the methods to do so can be.