A lot of hackers view "content" as raw grist for their business mills, measured in gigabytes and intrinsically "free". Not surprisingly, many of us that have worked in industries that produce this "content" and know how much work it takes to produce are less glibly generous about piracy.
I'd vote for both as evil because I also don't see much social benefit in hooking people into clickfarming their way through mindless reward loops. But pirate sites are the lowest because by abusing internet freedoms they give censors the ammunition they need to lobby for tools that will inevitably be abused to restrict more important freedoms.
A lot of hackers view "content" as raw grist for their business mills, measured in gigabytes and intrinsically "free". Not surprisingly, many of us that have worked in industries that produce this "content" and know how much work it takes to produce are less glibly generous about piracy.
Or said in another way, a lot of hackers understand that in a market, value is unrelated to cost of production, while others who produce "content" don't.
Antiques that were made of high quality materials by skilled craftsmen are more expensive now for the same reasons they were originally. A tailored wool suit costs more than a t-shirt and jeans. A hand-painted painting by a skilled artist cost more than a sweatshop knockoff.
Supply is a function of profit potential. Production cost isn't the only factor but pretending it's irrelevant is ridiculous.
I'd vote for both as evil because I also don't see much social benefit in hooking people into clickfarming their way through mindless reward loops. But pirate sites are the lowest because by abusing internet freedoms they give censors the ammunition they need to lobby for tools that will inevitably be abused to restrict more important freedoms.