Here's the kicker: to a great extent, doing what is mutually beneficial *coincides* with self-interest.

Isn't that some crazy sh*t? lol

So why it is that so many of us put our wants and desires ahead of our needs? Because we're lost and confused. Not because it's human nature to be self-destructive.

If it were the majority of cases, then no one would be that poorly off and the system wouldn't be skewed so much as it is now in terms of disparity between the haves and the have nots.

You're not thinking, here. This isn't even arguable. Who doesn't want security with respect to personal safety, property, our rights and freedoms, etc.? Almost everyone wants that, and it's all greatly enhanced when we work together for our mutual benefit; in fact, it's absolutely essential that we do so, because as isolated individuals we have almost no power whatsoever. Need proof? Julian Assange. He's basically being murdered, and no one in a position to stop it is lifting a finger on his behalf.

I'm sorry if I misread what you said in whole/in part...I post a ton of posts to various threads of interest and sometimes I read stuff quickly and post without reading context behind every sentence.

I agree working together for our mutual benefit is good, it's just that often people find ways to tip the balance in their favor to come out ahead/better off than the others they're working with. This isn't always the case, though, and I wish it were more common for people to work together more for the common good than just for themselves.

(And yes, Assange is being railroaded by the system and thrown to the wolves by those he sought to help/protect....but that's delving into politics so i'll leave it at that on that particular topic/person...if you want to discuss him/etc I am avialable via PM, though.)

I have a huge collections of games in my home country.
I guess 1000 physical copies, from MSDOS to DVD era games.

Now I live abroad, where there is only rain... :(
Anyway, the only way I have to play my legally owned games, is by downloading them from abandonware sites.

Nice sized collection....I have a good amount of physical CDs/etc as well(though not that many).

BTW: Why couldn't you bring your collection with you, if I may ask?

(Also I hope you protect your collection with insurance in case of loss/damage/etc...that seems like a nice sized collections and it'd be a sad thing if something happened to it like that one gamer who lost his collection to fire.)

I think we're socialized to accept living as isolated individuals, and see it as "normal". It is normal in that it's become normative, but it isn't healthy.

Re Assange, fair enough.

BTW, I should warn you that I get pretty feisty when arguing. I'm working on being more relaxed. Stay tuned. ;p

My "I don't identify as a human" isn't for nothing, because I am not a social animal. Defining human essence is usually very, very stupid; and more often than not dangerous. Not to mention, is-ought fallacy.

All right, apologizing for derailing thread once again, but this is a something of personal interest to me, so I couldn't resist. We should probably open few other threads discussing ontology and ethics.

Games are art, art should be preserved and accessible in as many ways and means as possible.

Not everyone can own the Mona Lisa, but you can buy all manner of replications.

The digital age has meant that perfect copies of art in their original and working form can be spread and owned in ways that did not exist a few decades ago.

If you're able to buy a copy, then you should absoloutely have the right to utilise that copy sans copy protection or barriers that ad nothing to the art itself.

....to the potentially controversial opinion;

If you are unable to buy or legally obtain a form of artwork in the digital age, as a member of society you have an obligation to contribute to the preservation of our art and history.

Abolish state-monopoly on legal use of violence and abolish public sector courts in favor of private courts that are not incentivized to side with any party.

It's scary as hell seeing how the state can treat those who tread on the state, then the individual has no rights. If it's you against the state and the state wants to preserve its own interest, how is the state going to treat you in a state court? It's a horror show.

I have the same problem, I get annoyed so fast when people are not logically consistent or well-read enough on the subject they're trying to argue. Since this Canadian fellow (forgot his nick) called me out on it I've been trying to mind my manners a bit more.

Some of that stuff is survival mechanisms built into our very physiology/brain chemistry/etc. To change it would require a ton of effort(and possibly genetic alteration/medication of some sort/etc).

One more thing on assange(Because it's something I also take interest in): Basically they are using him in the game of 4d chess(as the net calls it)....some use him to get what they want from other people/etc in power, or use him as an example of not to f**k with certain groups/people...all under the guise of punishing a "bad guy", naturally. Most americans should be praising a ton of his work(iirc he didn't steal info he just leaked what he was given), yet they call him traitor because that's what they're being told to think.

Good points.

===========================

Aside/my more controversial opinion: I think rights holders/etc should be able to make money but not to such obscene amounts as they currently do via reselling/repackaging old games. I also think current copyright term limits are unfairly high and to make the public wait such long periods for media to fall into the commons is close to "criminal" imo.

I know if I were a game developer, I'd prefer people getting a chance to play my game instead of letting it be forgotten.

Just do the right thing when the game comes to GOG and buy it.