• 3 Posts
  • 713 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 4th, 2024

help-circle
  • information should be abundant

    Perhaps so, but isn’t that up to whoever creates the information? If you invent a story, why would you not be entitled to own it?

    For much of human history, artistry of all sorts has been a profession, as much as a hobby. The idea of attribution and ownership over one’s art has been a core part of why that has worked and allowed creators to thrive. I would argue that the alternative of having no such system at all would ultimately lead to less art and information being created and shared at all, if the creation process is unsustainable at an individual creator’s level.



  • Your argument so far has been “it’s new (even though it’s not) and I don’t like it”. If you wanna get extra pedantic, the idea of copyright has been floated since the 1500s, and the concept of owning art predates even that. It wasn’t until the late 1700s that our current “modern” copyright system began taking form.

    Regardless, none of that changes the fact that it’s still a real part of our lives now. We don’t live 2.75 million years in the past, we live now. Presumably, you wipe after defecating, don’t you? Didn’t you know that toilet paper is a modern invention that we didn’t have a million years ago and only went to market 3 years before slavery was abolished in the US? It’s bad and we shouldn’t use it, right???

    I still don’t get what any of this has to do with anything we’re talking about, though. I feel like maybe you’ve talked yourself into a corner by making up nonsense and then trying to defend it. This is dumb, just like every argument defending piracy; it uses sovereign citizen logic where you make up arbitrary rules and definitions that nobody else in society agrees with to justify bad behavior.

    If you wanna pirate stuff, then pirate it. But just own it; don’t make up silly defenses for why it’s okay, because they don’t hold up under scrutiny.






  • Unlike physical goods, information can flow and be copied freely at a fundamental physics level.

    The electricity and silicon required to make this happen are not free, on a societal or physical level. There is a tangible cost to this transfer, even if you’re ignoring the social construct of copyright.

    I think this issue comes from a misunderstanding of “free”, possibly conflating it for “trivially easy”.

    Rather than develop a system that rewards digital artists based on how much something is used for free

    Feel free to come up with such a system. I think you’ll find that a rather difficult task.