• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 25th, 2023

help-circle

  • often in cases like this there is no real personal responsibility involved, and your disdain stems from a lack of empathy.

    nicotine is a strongly addictive chemical and lots of users have active addictions. in many locales and markets disposable vapes are increasingly becoming the cheapest or only way to scratch that itch, in addition to americans being propagandized for years into believing that vaping in general is somehow a healthier way to deal with your nicotine addiction. either way vaping is heavily pushed on nicotine addicts in america to such a point that i genuinely am not so certain personal responsibility factors into the equation anymore. it’s very similar to opium in china during the century of humiliation or the war on drugs or something - just a clearly systemic problem spurred by greedy people against the poor that is justified to other poor people through fallacious moral reasoning.

    the guy you mentioned… knows the obvious point that buying disposables is contrarian to his opinion. that doesn’t invalidate his beliefs. he’s an addict, not necessarily a hypocrite. instead of being crabs in a bucket and tearing down the people who already agree with you why don’t you try and point people’s anger rightfully towards big tobacco companies who managed to swindle the world into picking up the nasty habit again in the name of avarice. those people hurt you, me, and the guy in your story. they deserve you being mad at them, not this rando you mention.


  • Honestly all the copyleft licenses and others are garbage, hot take.

    It’s a bandaid solution that people refuse to let go of, like a safety blanket. Absolute freedom of information is so surprisingly controversial of an opinion these days. It makes me fucking sick to so frequently see people behave in a way that feels literally brainwashed.

    “nooooOooooooOooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FUUUUUCK WE CANT ABOLISH COPYRIGHT THERE ARE STARVING CHILD ARTISTS IN AFRIIIIICCCCCAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaAAA”

    inb4 “yOu wOuLDn’T bE hAPpY iF sOmEOnE STOLE yoUr aRt, wOulD yoU??? CHECKMATE ATHEIST”

    Actually I’d be pretty flattered if someone liked art I made so much they decided to copy it or use it in their own way somehow. I’m not a psycho fucker who thinks state violence should be leveraged against someone for how they chose to copy my work. All copyright apologia I see is even worse hypocrisy than the literal fascist rhetoric you also see nowadays… and those fuckers are some of the biggest hypocrites! Anyway, not to be a crazy fucker myself and respond to my own rhetorical strawman lmfao.


  • I think without some agreement on the value of authorship / creation of original works, it’s pointless to respond to the rest of your argument.

    I agree, for this reason we’re unlikely to convince each other of much or find any sort of common ground. I don’t think that necessarily means there isn’t value in discourse tho. We probably agree more than you might think. I do think authors should be compensated, just for their actual labor. Art itself is functionally worthless, I think trying to make it behave like commodities that have actual economic value through means of legislation is overreach. It would be more ethical to accept the physical nature of information in the real world and legislate around that reality. You… literally can “download a car” nowadays, so to speak.

    If copying someone’s work is so easily done why do you insist upon a system in which such an act is so harmful to the creators you care about?


  • Kindly, I believe your blind faith in your societal institutions to be at best naive and at worst a danger to liberty. I mean this as a genuine warning meant to be heeded, not a personal criticism directed at you. I’m an American. This exact blind institutional faith I see you and many other Europeans frequently espouse online was a core part of what caused the civil collapse of my own society. It will happen in yours too if you guys aren’t careful. The prevalence of this way of thinking amongst Europeans I meet online is a dangerous omen. You guys remind me a lot of us back in the 90s. Please. Take it not from an ignorant American, but from a global citizen who has already been down the rough and tumble line.

    I think I’ll just quote you from another comment you made in this exact same thread, because you encapsulated it better than I ever could:

    “…If your country is corrupt then yes the people with money have power. Not every country is corrupt enough for people to really buy into it.”

    This is a fiction. It is a noble lie you are told by people with power. Think semantically. What is corruption? What is “money,” “power,” etc? In your mind, in countries that you believe to be “one of the good ones,” one where by your description the nation “isn’t corrupt enough for people to really buy into it”… who controls the nation and how? Realistically, you aren’t going to be able to provide an answer to that question that is free from discussing existing corruption, because your idea of supposed societies that cross some arbitrary threshold of being “pure vs corrupt”… doesn’t exist in reality. There exists not one corruption-free government, now or ever, in the history of mankind.

    This sounds fantastical from your POV but I do mean it as a genuine warning to be heeded. First it starts with gradual scrapes and nicks at the block of reason… stuff exactly like this that everyone engages in on some level, to some degree - it is a transmogrification of the social conscious… soon yet the fascists carve their own damnable Michelangelo from the marble, instead.


  • Some communities on this site speak about machine learning exactly how I see grungy Europeans from pre-18th century manuscripts speaking about witches, Satan, and evil… as if it is some pervasive, black-magic miasma.

    As someone who is in the field of machine learning academically/professionally it’s honestly kind of shocking and has largely informed my opinion of society at large as an adult. No one puts any effort into learning if they see the letters “A” and “I” in all caps, next to each other. Immediately turn their brain off and start regurgitating points and responding reflexively, on Lemmy or otherwise. People talk about it so confidently while being so frustratingly unaware of their own ignorance on the matter, which, for lack of a better comparison… reminds me a lot of how historically and in fiction human beings have treated literal magic.

    That’s my main issue with the entire swath of “pro vs anti AI” discourse… all these people treating something that, to me, is simple & daily reality as something entirely different than my own personal notion of it.


  • Well to be honest lemmy is less prone to knee-jerk reactionary discussion but on a handful of topics it is virtually guaranteed to happen no matter what, even here. For example, this entire site, besides a handful of communities, is vigorously anti-AI; and in the words of u/jsomae@lemmy.ml elsewhere in this comment chain:

    “It seems the subject of AI causes lemmites to lose all their braincells.”

    I think there is definitely an interesting take on the sociology of the digital age in here somewhere but it’s too early in the morning to be tapping something like that out lol


  • Even if we accept all your market liberal premise without question… in your own rhetorical framework the Disney lawsuit should be ruled against Disney.

    If a human uses AI to recreate the exact tone, structure and other nuances of say, some best selling author, they harm the marketability of the original works which fails fair use tests (at least in the US).

    Says who? In a free market why is the competition from similar products and brands such a threat as to be outlawed? Think reasonably about what you are advocating… you think authorship is so valuable or so special that one should be granted a legally enforceable monopoly at the loosest notions of authorship. This is the definition of a slippery-slope, and yet, it is the status quo of the society we live in.

    On it “harming marketability of the original works,” frankly, that’s a fiction and anyone advocating such ideas should just fucking weep about it instead of enforce overreaching laws on the rest of us. If you can’t sell your art because a machine made “too good a copy” of your art, it wasn’t good art in the first place and that is not the fault of the machine. Even big pharma doesn’t get to outright ban generic medications (even tho they certainly tried)… it is patently fucking absurd to decry artist’s lack of a state-enforced monopoly on their work. Why do you think we should extend such a radical policy towards… checks notes… tumblr artists and other commission based creators? It’s not good when big companies do it for themselves through lobbying, it wouldn’t be good to do it for “the little guy,” either. The real artists working in industry don’t want to change the law this way because they know it doesn’t work in their favor. Disney’s lawsuit is in the interest of Disney and big capital, not artists themselves, despite what these large conglomerates that trade in IPs and dreams might try to convince the art world writ large of.





  • yeah, and that should horrify you: because Western anti-AI hysteria is deeply rooted in a fascist cultural obsession with “ownership” of thoughts and ideas.

    who the fuck cares if you used an AI tool to do work?

    a decently designed course in academia won’t be something you can just “cheat” on. there’s this implication that the behavior is somehow the responsibility of the student body, so much so they should be punished for it; when there is no accountability for the professors and educators who actually design a shit-ass curriculum that makes students engage in these behaviors rather than actually learning. students are the victims here, not academia. academic dishonesty policies assume there is some massive contingent of students trying to “cheat the system” at all times and thus we must rabidly defend academia from it, as if she is some virgin maid. that isn’t true. the vast majority of students do not cheat. self-reported rates of cheating remain at a constant 25-35% of the student body over large periods of time. why? because it’s a myth. there aren’t large numbers of people trying to “defraud” academia. sure, it happens, but is it enough to justify the many more lives that are ruined by frivolous accusations?

    i would cite case studies but literally it is so fucking common just google search and take your pick for whatever story tickles your exact rhetorical mindset.

    and no, i’m not some “cheater” myself trying to defend academic dishonesty. i’ve played by the rules my entire academic career and im not gonna sit and be strawmanned bc i happen to notice the absolutely fucking egregious grifts and power imbalances that compose the modern academy. these people will charge you hundreds of thousands of dollars and then treat you worse than a fucking minimum wage mcdonald’s employee might treat the customers. it’s absolutely fucked in every way, they are enemies to education and human knowledge. education is important, knowledge should be FREE for everyone no matter what!

    you should be pissed that these people masquerade as intellectuals when they’re nothing more than cowards trying to steal opportunity from the youth. it is not the place of the teacher to be the arbiter of discipline, that is the most heinous misreading of pedagogical principles and the fact that it has been allowed to go on for so long is a large part of why we sit here at the precipice of a new mass genocide, with thousands of ignorant fools clamoring it on or being willfully blind to it happening.