skulblaka

“You know what I am talking about colloquially”

I must not, because I see zero difference between Steam and GoG in this regard other than the fact that Steam provides a bunch of side services that GoG does not. Otherwise they’re both just selling you a revokable license to play a game.

Recently, eh?

You consider the 1800’s recent? Because there were news articles reporting on the issue back then.

Here’s an article from 1896 for you to read over, provided you care about learning how you’re wrong.

That is outside of our scope of vision and equally as unknowable as the true purpose of God.

Uncle Enzo isn’t going to let you down unless you let him down first.

So that you can stand on the lift, and not get head trauma every time you want to travel to a lower deck I’d assume.

How does it NOT require reconciling? Have you seen how conservatives treat LGBT folks?

Nice, bring it to court then. If you’re correct you’re due an unreasonable amount of money. What you will get, is laughed out of your case.

If you click on the video to watch it that’s explicit consent.

If you want to argue that the video being presented as an option is non-consensual conversion therapy, then we both have a massive lawsuit to put together, and I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Netflix used to be that and everyone bought the hell out of it. Then it enshittened and all the shows moved to proprietary platforms and now you need 19 subscriptions to get a selection of shows you care about. No thanks.

There are powerful lessons to be learned from the successes of Steam and Spotify if only the relevant people look and listen.

Okay so you admit in your own argument that they’re doing it slower. Yes, I WILL vote for a 50-year plan to fascism over voting for a 2-year plan to fascism, every time, without question. Gives us more time to turn it around before sitting officials burn everything down. At this point in this country I frankly don’t give much of a damn what the Democrat long term goals are anymore because the Republican party is such an immediate and obvious threat to safety, democracy, and human decency. Given such an environment it’s obvious that a few decades (or less) from now we’re going to be dealing with significant problems in the Democratic party, since it’s so easy to choose to usher them into power right now - it’s easy for bad actors to abuse that. And frankly there are already problems in the Democratic party. But I’d rather deal with that then, than deal with Republican ideals now, because instituting Republican ideals now will not leave us with a future where we even have the choice to deal with Democrat problems.

Fair points on the locally run AIs, I admit I don’t have experience with those and didn’t realize they were run differently. I defer to your knowledge there.

I disagree on the drawing point though. Nearly every artist learns their style by learning from other artists, in the same way that every programmer learns to code by reading other code. It IS different, but I don’t think it’s THAT different. It’s doing the exact same thing a human would do in order to create a piece of art, just faster, and automated. Instead of spending ten years to learn to paint in the style of Dali you can tell an AI to make an image in the style of Dali and it will do exactly what a human would - inspect every Dali painting, figure out the common grounds, and figure out how to replicate them. It isn’t illegal to do that, nor do I consider it immoral, UNLESS you are profiting from the resulting image. Personally I view it as a fair use of those resources.

The sticky situation arrives when we start to talk about how those AIs were trained though. I think the training sets are the biggest problem we have to solve with these. Train it fully on public domain works? Sure, do what you want with it, that’s why those works are in the public domain. But when you’re training your AI on copyrighted works and then make money on the result? Now that’s a problem.

two people using the same seed will be able to create the same image.

In my experience ONE person using the same seed will not be able to create the same image. I can feed an identical prompt into an AI artist 100 times and be handed 100 similar, but different pictures at the end. This may change as AI science evolves however.

so nothing stops me from saying “Hey, generate an image of Kirby”.

Every AI image creator has blacklisted words/tags for preventing copyright abuse or prevent creation of offensive images. Most AIs won’t draw you pictures of Disney characters (anymore). Many AIs won’t draw pictures of Jesus or public figures like politicians. No AI on the market will draw you a gory execution. The managers of the AI in question just have to implement a blacklist about it and they can stop you from running prompts for whatever they want.

There’s also nothing stopping you from sitting down at your desk and drawing a picture of Kirby with a pen. When you’re done, do you own that image?

I agree with you that AI art shouldn’t be copyrightable or at least, if it is, there should be some significant hoops to jump through. But I don’t think the arguments given here are good reasons why.

There are a multitude of reasons to recommend against using Brave.

Personally I refuse to install it because the CEO and creator, Brendan Eich, unapologetically donates to right wing and anti-gay establishments. Many people refuse to use it because it games the users and advertisers with a proprietary cryptocurrency that isn’t actually useful for anything except making money for Brave. Others refuse to use it because in 2020 Brave was caught adding their own affiliate codes and tracking data to websites in the url bar, even ones that were typed in by hand. That was eventually rolled back but it didn’t help me trust them any.

Vivaldi is a better browser option, in my opinion.

Firefox + uBlock Origin served me about 4 hours of video last night without an ad in sight.

I remember back in the day when I had apple devices where they would push updates for devices long past their capability to actually run the updated software. Rather than refuse the update or get a pruned patch with security fixes only, it would force updates and bloat your phone and grind it into unresponsive unusability after a few years.

I hear that’s not so much the case anymore, so that’s nice. But I remember. The main reason I upgraded my phone was because of that, the hardware was great, but I could hardly use the software anymore even after clean installs.

My point being, I guess, extended support is great if managed properly but it can also become a bludgeon with which to drive you toward the new generations of devices.