Hacker News Reader

Comment by usef- | Hacker News Reader

Not to comment on the rest of it, but this FAQ answer is a bit flawed:

> Q: Aren't you stealing from artists by running this script?

> MKBSD accesses publicly available media through the Panels app's own API. It doesn't do anything shady or illegal. The real problem here is Panels and MKBHD's complete inability to provide a secure platform for the artists that they're exploiting working with. Any other app could have avoided the issues that make MKBSD possible had it been engineered competently.

That's pretty embarrassing for the app developers, but it's not addressing the question.

"It's okay to extract the artists' sell-able work for free, because their landlord didn't lock the door"?

View on HN

> "It's okay to extract the artists' sell-able work for free, because their landlord didn't lock the door"?

Well paraphrased.

> artists that they're exploiting

I thought he pays the artists?

They figure a 50-50 split is exploitation, where there are tens of thousands of wallpaper apps that don’t see the light of day, because they don’t have someone like MKBHD backing them

> MKBSD accesses publicly available media through the Panels app's own API. It doesn't do anything shady or illegal.

I know this one. It's called coming up with an excuse for the thing you were going to do anyway.

> The real problem here is Panels and MKBHD's complete inability to provide a secure platform for the artists that they're exploiting working with.

You mean the ones you are exploiting right now?

> Any other app could have avoided the issues that make MKBSD possible had it been engineered competently.

No, they really couldn't have. Anyone can just take a screenshot.

We've all written slightly evil code, but the bullshit justification really set me off.

The project has a terrible (and pro-DRM) self-justification. But there’s still a person with flaws, insecurities, loved ones and dreams on the other side.

I doubt you mean that first sentence of your last paragraph, and those words are very harshly chosen. They might cause harm, and I’d suggest you’d reconsider them and republish your comment unless you truly stand by them.

Yeah you're right, that last part was pretty unnecessary.

it's hackernews though.

It's definitely copyright infringement. Also it's hilarious that the owner of this repo is advocating for DRM. When someone uses the word "exploit" to describe commercial transactions you just know they have room temperature IQ.

Are you sure about that? So much of "good business practice" is really exploiting your suppliers. If you are trying to underpay for a resource, or forcing cost cuts, or simply taking more of the pie that you previously gave your resource, for the same or better quality service, you are exploiting that resource.

Economic transactions only happen if there is a mutual benefit. Typically one side of the transaction has more market power than the other and captures more of the surplus but the transaction doesn't happen if one side is worse off from it.

The entire idea of economic transactions being exploitative is literal Marxist propaganda. If you read the word "exploit" in some news article and it's referring to economic transactions, you are reading propaganda.

I don't usually ask for citations on comment threads, but assserting that 'exploitation' is Marxist propaganda is gonna need some citations for me to take even remotely seriously. Otherwise, talk about room temperature IQs...

> Economic transactions only happen if there is a mutual benefit.

There are all sorts of coercive circumstances that may appear mutually beneficial on a superficial level, but may actually not be the case, whether due to contract details, opportunity costs, strategic mistakes, or otherwise. Perhaps this is true given perfect information and execution, but the real world is much more messy.

As an example, consider Spotify or Adobe's transition to a subscription model. There are a lot of people for whom those models are a very bad deal compared to what was.

It's a dog whistle. There are no studies on this, why would academia (which for the field that would study this is 100% composed of leftists) have a study on leftist dog whistles?

Also, putting any value on "studies" when they almost universally fail to replicate outside of hard sciences is dumb.

Hillsdale College somehow sends me a circular several times a year full of right-wing neoconservative religious cocksucking. That right there immediately disproves your "100% composed of leftists" assertion. I'm sure the students and faculty at BYU or USD or any number of other religious academic institutions would agree.

For someone so in touch with what studies say you seem to have a very inaccurate view of the political leanings of academics

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GYOm6ciXcAAZ0vl?format=jpg&name=...

You see, all the fake fields of studies are field with leftists. And sure, you might say democrats aren't leftists, which is what every dumbass marxist says.

> I don't usually ask for citations on comment threads

No - please do!!! It'll ensure we have robust discussions on this great site!

"exploit" has two perfectly usable definitions in this context, essentially. One is negative, one is not.

    To employ to the greatest possible advantage.

    To make use of selfishly or unethically.

Yes, they are always using the second definition.

Loving this classic HackerNews-type discussion!!!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com