- 0 Posts
- 61 Comments
This is objectively false. The propaganda of IP is that it is designed to protect the little guy. History shows that this was never the case as copyright was always a tool of censorship and control.
The patent system has been twisted beyond the breaking point since before I was born. It does not exist for its intended purpose anymore and instead is a legal arms race between corporations and governments.
Trademark law has also been leveraged by monopolists. Although arguably its purpose makes the most sense being a commercial protection used exclusively against other commercial entities. It too has been abused regularly.
The average copyright court case is around $250,000+ from begging to conclusions in the federal courts. Asserting or defending your rights is insanely expensive.
Many innovators and developers have been litigated out of existence by not being able to pay to defend themselves in the case of patent trolls.
IP is for the wealthy and their favorite proxy the corporation to create artificial scarcity. They have authored a regulation empire to commercialize our culture. They act as gatekeepers to our thoughts and creations. It really is a bizarre system.
I have advocated for the abolishment of IP many times in my life. Never, in my wildest dreams, would have thought that it would be abolished willingly through AI.
All it took was to show that they could make more money by ignoring it. Like a light switch IP suddenly gets switched off. Now the corrupted federal government considers it a matter of national security and will protect it at all costs.
Truly a bizarre world we live in.
Yeah, I totally get Roblox is a huge platform with a lot to offer other than pedos trying to RP with kids.
Personally, after watching my kids play it and seeing a lot of weird stuff like pregnancy, implied sex, possible rape, etc. I felt that without constant supervision it was not safe for them.
I think a dialogue tree for RP when kids are involved would be safer without totally breaking all RP servers.
I like the idea of of restricting all communication to 18+. It is pretty extreme, but I think considering how bad it has gotten it wouldn’t be completely unwarranted.
I think that if a kid can’t read then they are generally safe from the worst of grooming honestly.
I mean, like I said, there were a lot of inappropriate situations I witnessed which made me uncomfortable besides just what was said in chat.
This is why I don’t let my kids play. It wasn’t just the chat.
Also, once a kiddo hits 13 they can voice chat. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what happens next.
For me, personally, it is a hard no. If you supervise your children constantly then it is probably somewhat safe… That is not really reassuring is it?
Ahh I see your confusion. First of all we are dealing with a specific game used in a specific way.
If culturally pedophiles would do scrabble tournaments for kids then people would react and say we should stop scrabble tournaments because pedophiles have captured them.
This is not saying adults can’t play Scrabble, just that scrabble tournaments run by pedophiles aren’t cool.
Roblox is being used as a similar tool.
Good news is there are lots games like Roblox with better graphics and gameplay that are not infested with pedophiles trying to groom kids.
So you are not being deprived of anything, unless of course you are a pedo that wants to groom kids on Roblox.
If Lemmy was a child’s game and it was full of pedophiles actively grooming them then yes we would need to shut it down. Your analogy misses the point completely.
We’re are dealing with a child’s game where pedophiles are actively going after youth right now as we type.
They should be shutdown and charges pressed against the developers for allowing this. This is the only way forward at this point.
Your point about taking away chat ruining the game is also nonsensical. Only some RP would be affected and could be gotten around easily with a dialogue tree.
I was wondering what they planned on doing with these increasingly fast processors. Apparently, it will be used to spy on you while providing training data to their AI. Why the hell this is acceptable I don’t know. It reminds me of those bad actors who use to mine Bitcoin covertly on other people’s computers with compromised software or web pages.
Because they are assholes losers that care more about winning than the disgusting things they have to do to win.
There is no honor or decorum left in politics, just naked greed and the concentration of power. Our politicians are the result of the corrupt environment they live in.
Until we seriously start removing money from politics we will be stuck in a ever increasing enshitification feedback loop where the only people who are represented are the wealthy.
Exercising copyright in a court of law is extremely expensive. $250k+ minimum for a federal case. It is not a system designed for the artists you are describing.
In fact, it is just the opposite with corporations going after small artists regularly, not the other way around.
How has copyright been a deterrent to AI? This is a great case example of the system working as it is intended. Benefiting corporations which is what the system is designed to do.
Most major recording artists do not own their works. Where is their protection? The system is once again not designed for the individual.
Copyright was designed to create artificial scarcity. It was created out of the guilds back in England and was designed to censor and control the printing industry NOT protect authors rights.
While I will admit copyright is the most palatable of the Intellectual Properties it is still extremely problematic and we would be better off without it.
Don’t even get me started on patents and trademarks and the abuse these system perpetrate on our society. There is no doubt the elimination of intellectual property would be beneficial to our society at the detriment of the rent-seeking capitalists.
Artist that want to make money can preform or sell their work like they have always done. IP is about commercial interests like royalties and licensing. This has nothing to do with the actual promotion of arts and science. It is about control.
Most artist don’t do it to make money even. This confusion of expression and commercial interest is the crux of what we are dealing with.
There is no natural protection from someone copying, remixing, or reinventing your work. This is literally how art is made. No one creates in a vacuum and everyone is inspired by someone else.
There are already no protections for the little guy. Corporations borrow and use whatever they want. The IP system is NOT for the average person. It is designed to benefit and enrich an extreme minority and it does this well.
You have no take other than approving the purchase and sale of our culture controlled by corporations.
You say IP is for the little guy, the average federal copyright lawsuit cost a quarter of a million dollars to pursue.
You have no clue about remix culture which was destroyed by profiteers. Corporations control the majority of artist’s commercial music. Many artists don’t own their own work.
Corporations constantly steal IP. AI has shown us that they don’t respect the very laws they created.
The only person living in a dystopia and loving it is you. The abolishment of IP would cause an explosion of science and art like the world hasn’t seen since they created laws to prevent it.
99+% of art is never sold. The vast majority of artist don’t make money. Who really cares about the extreme minority who use capitalism to control our culture. They don’t get to decide what the rest of the world does purely for their economic interests.
No they don’t need any mechanism. The arts and sciences existed for thousands of years without modern silly interpretations for commercial interests.
To answer your first question no.
Intellectual property is a societal construct and it is as real as racism is. Which isn’t saying much.
If an artist doesn’t want their music to be heard and possibly replicated, altered, or used in a way they don’t like then it is their responsibility to never release it. Only by hiding it can they keep the world from misusing it.
If you think it is stupid to not like a brand because it is toxic to the community then I just don’t know what to think. Their decisions hurt their brand and people don’t like it.
We come here to talk about it and here you are chiming in that they are stupid for not liking something objectively that is not likable. I think in a lot of ways this makes you seem stupid yourself.
I think your beef is with something that has nothing to do with this. You also seem to ignore many huge brands have come and gone and Nintendo is no different. Pretending they are monolithic or untouchable belays the reality that if enough people refuse to buy their product they will fail.
The market self corrects all the time and not everyone shares your view that we should eat shit shut up and enjoy it.
Please consider joining the People Preventing Longform Text From Going Extinct (PPLTFGE). PPLTFGE believes text can actually be quicker and more concise than video. Most influencer videos can be compressed into a couple lines of actual information that takes only a few seconds to read as opposed to watching a ten minute video.
Don’t delay, donate today to the PPLTFGE!
I think the advent of AI really highlights that we are finally on a post artificial scarcity trajectory. Corporations and the government have almost completely stopped caring about IP enforcement in the quest for AI.
The system you describe sounds somewhat reasonable. I was just pointing out it never existed in the first place. It is a compelling fantasy put forth by IP Maximalist to justify their rent seeking behavior. Making that fantasy a reality is probably possible in a non-fascist society.
I am a bit confused by the last part where without an IP system corporations would be allowed to abuse artists. That is literally what they do everyday with the current laws with AI being their ultimate fuck you to artists. I suppose part of the issue is these laws have been exclusively written by corporations to benefit corporations.