The mishna distinguishes between noticeable changes and those that aren’t noticeable. \u00a0The robber acquires only through a noticeable change. \u00a0There is a debate in the mishna regarding slaves – whether they are treated like land in which the robber does not acquire the slave or is it like movable property and it is acquired by the robber. \u00a0 Rav paskens like Rabbi Meir that the slaves are like land. \u00a0This psak is questionedby the gemara from a number of different directions. \u00a0Can usage of a stolen slave who isn’t working be compared to usage of an uninhabited house – where one who uses another’s house since he isn’t causing a loss for the owner, he does not need to pay? \u00a0What if one uses another’s boat without permission, what does he need to pay the owner? \u00a0The mishna distunguishes between coins that are ruined physically and those that are removed from currency. \u00a0The rabbis debate what exactly is the case of removed from currency – cannot be used in that country but can be used in another or cannot be used anywhere? \u00a0The gemara gets into a \u00a0case of one who takes a loan valued at an old currency and when he goes to pay back the loan, the currency is no longer in use. \u00a0Rav and Shmuel debate the case and Shmuel’s opinion is questioned especially in light of how Rav Nachman understand’s Shmuel’s psak.<\/p>\n