[ank_the_elder]

The level of condescension required to write something like that is truly astounding. Not only are you assuming everyone who disagrees with you is wrong - but you are assuming that the error stems from youth, and in particular from "bad decisions" as judged solely by you!

How arrogant do you have to be to observe humanity and decide that "bad decision making" is not only all around you but you are also somehow immune to it - and a distinguished observer and commentator, to boot!

If this is not a textbook definition of bigotry[0], I do not know what it is.

[0]: "intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself"

[youngButEager]

Actually, no, you're 100% wrong -- dangerously wrong.

Failure to follow the law has consequences. My point is that, simply. "Getting a benefit that is legally required to be paid for AND NOT PAYING" is stealing.

Staying out of trouble is a SURVIVAL STRATEGY.

A lot of people out there have very poor survival inclinations. Making bad decisions can really hurt you.

While stealing from the author of copyrighted works may not land you in prison -- by so passionately arguing in favor of stealing from the authors means you only respect the law when it suits you.

In my experience (running engineering teams, startups, rental properties, military experience) -- a sign from anyone that they play 'loosey-goosey' with the rules/law etc. is a WARNING. I've noticed, as have most parents, managers, etc. that when a person violates the law in one area -- "makes a bad decision" -- they for whatever reason cannot seem to restrict that poor decision making to only 1 area of their behavior.

I'm not a psychologist, so I'm not sure why, for example, when a person rationalizes stealing copyrighted material -- "gets the benefit of another person's effort that they were required to pay for and DID NOT PAY" -- I'm not sure why they seem to 'rationalize' a lot of other bad decisions. Maybe there's research in psychology that studies this, not sure. Would not be surprised. Maybe in criminal justice psychology.

But ask any parent with a troubled kid; or a cop who has 'regulars'; or a judge who has 'regulars'; or a long-time tech manager; or any other person who over time was exposed to a broad spectrum of people and behavior.

If you folks are rationalizing away stealing an artist's works, you would lie about doing that in a job interview.

Why? Because it's wrong to get the benefit of copyrighted material without paying.

Richard Stallman rebelled against 'closed IP' and look at the positive results.

So go out there and channel that rebellion. DON'T STEAL THOUGH.

If I'm interviewing you and I ask you "ever seeded a torrent cloud?" and you say 'No' and that is a lie -- YOU JUST LIED TO A TOTAL STRANGER. One 'bad decision' -- stealing copyrighted works -- led to another -- lying in a professional setting.

Where does that bad decision-making stop? HARD TO KNOW.

But having suffered the consequences of 'letting it slide', and since 1993 some of those consequences were quite painful -- if I catch someone exposing me to possible risk by their conscious volition -- I KNOW I'VE BEEN WARNED.

Once you get older, you'll either (1) take a Richard Stallman approach, or (2) realize the benefit of stealing from people is outweighed by the negative effects (lying to a hiring manager for example).

If you solemnly believe "there are no consequences to stealing from people" I'm here to tell you, you are dead wrong.

[ank_the_elder]

I believe in psychology this is called white and black thinking. It's one of the many red flags I've found reading your comments. This idea of labelling people 'good' or 'bad' based on a single minimal interaction is also a red flag. I suggest you see a mental health professional - it's hard to live like that. I know there is stigma associated to it in the USA and other places, but if you want to get better that's probably the only way to do so.

Here's to hoping you seek the help you require.