afraid_of_zombies @ afraid_of_zombies @lemmy.world

Hail the Omnissiah! Praise be to the machine-god.

---

Read more

Posts

21

Comments

7,249

Joined

2 yr. ago

No. You obviously need help reading.

Is the photo of the image on my device? If so I own it. If you take a photo of it you own that photo as well.

It's a moral ought from an is. Informal logical fallacy.

Something is illegal therefore it is immoral.

No, those are two different facts. Perhaps in a better world there would be a lot of overlap between those two but in the world we live in it is not a given or even likely.

Yes my content and my tech. It is physically in my possession it is mine. If you take a picture of it congrats that picture is your picture. What part is confusing you exactly?

Did I see a sportsball event? I can talk about it to whom I want when I want.

Did I buy a physical book? I can take as many photos of it as I want.

Did I buy a cell phone? I can take apart it, modify it, reverse engineer it, benchmark it, and review it.

Now answer my question if you plan to go after another Daycare, Disney. No more evasions

I have ever right to remove a watermark from any image on my computer.

Unless of course you have the misconception that downloading something that someone else made is the same as owning it. In which case, I understand this might be difficult for you to grasp.

Oh hi Disney. Here to shut down another daycare for having a picture of Mickey Mouse?

I have full rights to do whatever the fuck I want with content and tech. If I want to make Daffy Duck solve a mystery with Cheech in Victorian England with Genghis Khan as the chief of Scotland yard and Fred Rodgers as the bad guy I am free to do so. If I buy a machine I can take apart all of it, reverse engineer it, modify it, and comment on it on YouTube.

Bite me corporate

It was always a definition argument. Oh and that wasn't actually ironic just thought you would like to know.

Now instead of trying to score rhetorical points why don't you answer literally any of the questions I asked in the previous comment. I know it's vital to defend your BFF Rittenhouse but you don't do a good job defending him when you don't actually engage with what is being presented.

How gracious of them.

Stealing: depriving you of what you own

Copying: taking a picture of what you made.

Stealing is not copying. You still have whatever you started with.

Yes it is perfectly appropriate for someone who burned a backup copy of a DVD they paid for to go to prison for ten years

I am not understanding. They will now be even more effective at what they do and will be building a tech stack that no one else has access to and you think this is a win for the little guy?

If you owned a store, then a Walmart setup next to it and Walmart rolled out some new barcode system that your scanners didn't work on how the hell would that benefit you?

Not only are the already bigger, they are getting efficiencies they aren't sharing with your business. You want open protocols, you want tool sharing, you want the market as a whole to be getting more efficient. You don't want some company that already won able to pulverize by sheer size anyone who competes.

I am just sitting here with my eye twitching thinking of all the code I have had to deal with from German companies over the years.

Fakelandia it is on a continent that you probably haven't heard of.

Yeah in theory but in practice that isn't happening. In theory the laws could be structured such that creatives are being paid fairly and distributors make some money and that the general public knows the stuff will be public domain in a relatively short period of time.

No one is doing it and they had hundreds of years to figure out how to do it. You are asking us to take it on faith and I personally will not.

You can do the same thing with the Hardy Boys. You can find the same page word for word in different books. You can also do that with the Bible. The authors were plagiarizing each other.

It doesn’t add anything new to the sum total of the creative zeitgeist because it’s just remixes of things that already exist.

Do yourself a favor and never ever go into design of infrastructure equipment or eat at a Pizza Hut or get a drink from Starbucks or work for an American car company or be connected to Boeing.

Everyone has this super impressive view of human creativity and I am waiting to see any of it. As far as I can tell the less creative you are the more success you will have. But let me guess you ride a Segway, wear those shoes with toes, have gone through every recipe of Julia Childs, and compose novels that look like Finnegan's Wake got into a car crash with EE Cummings and Gravity's Rainbow.

Now leave me alone with I eat the same burger as everyone else and watch reruns of Family Guy in my house that looks like all the other ones on the street

Anyone supporting this better be against right of repair and jail time for anyone discussing a sporting event without written permission

True but you people have had hundreds of years to fix the system and have not.

Wow so much freedom. You can't even alter a picture that you own.

Task == murder

When I hire a task rabbit is that the same as hiring a hitman? When I open task manager should I see process "kill my cheating ex"?

But sure, get hung up on asking them to define every word in their statements, t

Did I do that? Yes or no question.

that’s a good way to not have to actually engage with the concept.

I am fine with engaging with the topic, I did so. He/she clung to definitions while I was blunt and pointed out that a gun is not a screwdriver and should be banned or regulated just like we do with any weapon.

Thanks. Here maybe this

This is a small contactor. When that blue center part goes in 1L1 becomes connected to the 2T1 and the same things happens to the other two. Basically I am using a little bit of electricity to flip a switch on or off. Turning on or off the motor.

The blue center part is what I asked him to push in by hand.