well, in short... i agree with points 1, 2 and 4 and disagree with 3.
point 1 - yes, it promotes ignorance. but i agree with what y'all have said that it's simply the next step in the evolution. also, people having to actually learn something would be at the cost of decent music. soulseek and ag before it had good music because they were easy to use. when mp3 trading was IRC/FTP only the music selection was HORRIBLE. but... its' true that p2p apps support people grabbing stuff without having any larger understanding; which i think in the end will be bad.
point 2 - p2p makers absolutely have no sense of community and despise their users as profit potential. any community that develops within a p2p i think is doomed the same way our napster community would have been doomed had it stayed around. its' the nature of capitalism and unless a program is open source you shouldn't assume otherwise. it will take years before a p2p that's closed source can be trusted simply due to it's history (like say, mIRC is).
point 3 - i think people being forced to run servers (which is illegal) is GOOD for p2p. before p2p it was harder to get obscure material; now it's not. also, i firmly believe people need to give back what they get. so whatever. sure, for stuff like movies (and if arrests happen) this will have to move to smaller, more private communities, but it should be a multisource p2p that offers those small communities; hehe.
point 4 - i should mention dumwaldo made this post in reference to movies. so yeah. for movies p2p is too much of a bother for me. so i guess he's right. then again, i'll be fucked if i'm paying $10 a month for a newsgroup server (which is the only real fast option outside of getting more involved in the 'scene' then i'd ever like to become as a 30 year old man).
ps; squid: you said you disagreed with him, then said you only use ftp or irc you winking 1337tst bastard.
