yttrx wrote:
> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> You're a pirate apologist, and you're clearly advocating the
>>> pirating of windows software, I suspect, because you have no regard
>>> or respect for the people who write it.
>> I suspect that you're an idiot. Explain exactly how I am advocating
>> piracy by drawing a distinction between hacking and theft.
> You're attempting to rationalize piracy--you're not talking about
> hacking here. Installing a cracked serial number is not hacking.
At what point did either I or the author write about a "cracked serial
number"? The phrase used was:
"/*IMPORTANT: The dreamweaver.exe MUST be cracked or patched, otherwise
it will not load under linux, try searching in Google for a crack*/
There's nothing on that page about serial numbers at all; you're
inventing something which doesn't exist.
"Cracked or patched" software does not mean pirated or stolen, it means
modified, usually without the benefit of the source. The purpose of
cracking the software *might* also be theft, but in this case the
author has made it clear that it is in order to allow the software to
*function* under Wine, not to *steal* it.
> Sorry charlie, yaint as smert as ya think yar, are ya.
I'm obviously smarter than you, since you don't even understand basic
semantics.
> You're rationalizing piracy instead of just having the nuts to come
> right out and say YEAH, IM A PIRATE, YARR.
Explain to me how someone who only uses GPL FOSS can be a pirate?
> No nuts. That's you.
Whereas you have plenty ... all rolling around inside your otherwise
vacuous skull.
>>>> I remember often using "cracks" on legitimate software; e.g. to
>>>> enable playing games without repeatedly swapping in and out the
>>>> install disks (a process that has now been refined using the
>>>> so-called "mini-ISO" method).
>>> Yes, but thats not necessary with dreaweaver.
>> Well the author of that article seems to think otherwise.
> No, he doesn't. In fact he never mentioned the details that
> you did, and now youre just making shit up.
>>> Wrong. You can either apply a legitimate license key--or you can
>>> apply a cracked license key. Have you ever actually used
>>> dreamweaver?
>> Have *you* ever actually used Dreamweaver under Wine, without using
>> the cracked binary? I'm sure the author would welcome your /extensive/
>> experience.
> The author SAYS YOU DONT HAVE TO USE THE CRACKED BINARY
Looks like it's *you* who's "making shit up". Quote the passage in that
article where the author states that "YOU DONT HAVE TO USE THE CRACKED
BINARY". "IMPORTANT: The dreamweaver.exe MUST be cracked or patched"
looks crystal clear to me.
> ASSHOLE...
Yes you are.
> Get it yet?
Apparently you don't.
> And yes, I've used dreamweaver under wine WITHOUT USING A CRACKED
> binary, and to be brutally frank, it sucks ass.
Well it would, if it didn't work, wouldn't it?
At first I thought you were just a Flatfish nym, but frankly I wouldn't
insult Flatty by comparing him to cabbage as ludicrously thick as you
... and *that's* saying something.
Goodbye.
/PLONK/
--
K.
http://slated.org - Slated, Rated & Blogged
This message has not been photoshopped in any way.
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.16-1.2133_FC5
21:05:41 up 40 days, 21:22, 3 users, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.11
|
|
