It is easier to switch to C# from Java than PHP, which is an ugly hack on top of ugly hacks. Classes, namespaces, type safety, all these are tacked on poorly to PHP, and native in Java or C#.

Just use ASP.NET if you want to use something familiar to Java.

I think people are judgemental because it's Adobe. I'm surprised it doesn't bug every third web site visitor to call the sys-admin and ask them to run Adobe Update, and have 4 security vulns a day.

Go tell that to Python.

There's no way Gmail is Java. Google is a PHP and Python shop.

It's simply that the honour system sort of works, but the whole thing tips over when you introduce people who aren't honourable. This applies equally everywhere - I'd bet that if you tried this same experiment in the US, you'd have similar results. Some will be honourable, some will be unsure of what to do and give up, and some will take full advantage of it. I expect we'd see the same result with DRM-free movie downloads (except that the confused group wouldn't exist - they'd probably split with the majority going to the honourable side). A large number of people would go legit, and a large number of people would continue to pirate - or even pirate more.

(And the idiot thing refers to the fact that there was more than one self-checkout lane, and they all got locked up by alcohol purchasers, and this is even taking into account that it's illegal to sell alcohol on public holidays here - they should have known better, and they definitely should have got the message after the first one).

Actually no. The law says a private company by the name of Re:Sound collects the royalties, and hands the money (minus "collection" and "distribution" costs of course) to the original performer of the tracks. The board simply supervises the licensing arrangement between "every man and his dog" and Re:Sound. It's identical to the shitty arrangement with SoundExchange in the USA.

The word you're looking for is "pyramid scheme". Your payments are funding the retirement of rich baby boomers, not yours. And now that the baby boomers are retiring, they're pulling the ladder behind them to ensure you don't get to use it. Keep watch of your local law changes. I bet there's lots of push to "raise the age of retirement" and shit like that...

Ah, but here's where it gets shit.

Make a CD yourself. Take it to a venue. Play said CD. Believe it or not, if you're in the US or Canada you'll get hit up by SoundExchange or Re:Sound to pay fees for playing music in public. If you point out that you are the holder of the copyright in question, they'll rightfully* point out that this is irrelevant, and you have to pay anyway. You then have to request your money back from them, which will be minus collection and distribution costs.

* in the sense that this is what the law says, not that it even resembles morally right.

That's not actually entirely true. Like SoundExchange in the USA, Re:Sound can collect money from you even for playing entirely original tracks, which you then have to claw back as the artist - minus actual collection and distribution costs, of course. The exception is if you actually perform it live. In that case, Re:Sound can't get a cent, even if you're playing Britney Spears songs (since you're paying SOCAN for the composer's rights, and you are the performer).

Thank fuck that most sane countries still consider that sort of thing illegal then. You guys really need to reign in your government.