GaMEChld @ GaMEChld @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

677

Joined

2 yr. ago

Imagine selling EV's to a group of people then surprised Pikachu facing when you turn your back on them and tell them they are infected by empathy and a "woke mind virus."

Imagine being so full of yourself that you Nazi salute away your entire international sales because guess what, the rest of the world doesn't think it's funny either.

Imagine.

You can be flippant or you can respond earnestly. You don't want to discuss then don't comment in the first place.

GALOLOLOL

You didn't answer the question. You dumb.

At the very least it comes down to regulation of speech. Advertising is speech. Even if you got rid of like actual commercials, you'll just shift advertising towards product placement and utilization rather than over advertisements.

Definitely a complex thing.

Who is dumber? The one calling people dumb, or the one unable to answer their questions? Don't use metaphors if you don't understand them or can't explain how they are valid.

Is the artist who writes with inspiration from previous works also stealing? Every story draws from other stories. Most art is always a representation of things that explicit consent was not always recorded to create.

This reminds me of Napster days. We can pontificate endlessly over the moral and philosophical arguments. Meanwhile, time is passing and the tools become more commonplace. I just skip to the end and change with the times. The other option is to die with old fashioned beliefs. Neither option is correct, it just is what it is. Which do you prefer?

... He's not equipped? Your metaphor was nonsensical. Let's say he did copy his exam answers. Who lost their answers as a result?

Hence copying is not stealing.

Additionally, who was harmed by the copying in your example, and how?

I kinda feel like all I hear is anti AI talk. Meanwhile I'm in the camp of don't demonize tools, demonize what people do with the tools that's damaging.

As for art, I don't know how to ascribe value to art. The Mona Lisa exists. As do copies of it that are worthless. At what point will the original have no value by virtue of the quality of the copies? Will a molecularly identical copy made with a Star Trek replicator make the original worthless? Or will it always be valued as the original?

Thank you for proving my point.

How about you try? Let me worry about the understanding. Give me a step by step rational argument of your thought processes. Surely, you aren't too stupid to do that?

I switched during the API fiasco. Most of my browsing is from mobile and I refused to use the crappy official app. Content had been declining in quality anyway, so I didn't feel that strongly about it.

Does anyone ever post those pictures back to the original person? I'd love to see the justification for the hypocrisy.

I agree that the sky being blue means you are a walrus. That's about the equivalent rationale you just demonstrated. A+

My intellectual faculties are wholly intact. It's your wisdom that is lacking. You display the petulant nature of youth. So you're either young, or you need to grow up. Have a nice puberty; be it physical or mental or both.

We can't even refine our own oil. We import sweet crude to our refineries and export sour crude to international refineries.

That seemed like rambling wheels within wheels nonsense.

Mr. Montag, you are looking at a coward. I saw the way things were going a long time back. I said nothing. I am one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the 'guilty,' but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself.

-Faber (Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451)

Sure ya did kiddo, sure ya did.

There's someone out there for everyone. I wish you luck finding them.