

Also the the goals of accelerationism, though it claims that such is a precursor to revolution and utopia.
Also the the goals of accelerationism, though it claims that such is a precursor to revolution and utopia.
How long ago did you buy? Still enough Musk fanboys that either don’t care that he is a Nazi or support it. Likely able to sell it and buy an objectively better vehicle, if it is an actual concern.
political protest.
You say potato, I say “not visually signaling support for a guy who gives nazi salutes, provides monetary aid to literal nazis, and is currently engaged in an active attempt to permanently end democracy in the US”.
wouldyoukindly kill -9 1
I get that when you spending 100m+ on game development, but a game needs to have actual value to the consumer, it has to be entertainment, and entertainment is art.
A side point on this: maybe some accounting transparency would help too. We know that that $100M+ isn’t going to the developers as they are some of the most underpaid tech workers. How much of a given game’s budget is actually going to compensate those directly contributing to it vs administration/execs?
Most investors are going to care about what kind of return they’re making. It’s the capital they provide that pays the paychecks.
Maybe that’s the problem. Valve did pretty well for themselves, even before steam, without putting investors in charge of their direction.
If you want to do volunteer work on video games – I have – then that’s not an issue.
I have indeed worked on my own and others projects without financial gain but that’s orthogonal to my point.
But typically games are made by paid workers, and those workers won’t work without their paychecks.
The games industry is full of chronically under-compensated workers. Again, nowhere did I advocate for people to work for free for commercial enterprises or anything of the like.
So they’re going to need to attract investors.
That’s a pretty good example of the False Dichotomy fallacy. There are numerous alternatives that don’t involve prioritizing profit over the product or service that a business produces.
While I’m not one who is generally in support of “how do we grow Lemmy/Fediverse?” posts (seems too forced and often advocating things that contributed to enshitification in the first place), I’m really happy to see the organic growth that you folks are experiencing. Congrats to yourselves and all of the new users getting away from corporate social media.
… If he wants to be a hedge fund exec, he should just go do that. The point of a business, contrary to the Chicago School MBA nonsense, is not to generate profit. It is to make a good or service that would otherwise be impractical for an individual, in a financially sustainable manner.
No. There’s a reason that I’ve avoided the public sector. It’s not that I don’t think that it’s a necessary post of society that has the capability to greatly improve the human condition. No. It’s that the people in charge have been consistently moving to the Right in my lifetime, as they give less and less of a shit about the people that they’re supposed to represent than billionaires’ bribes.
I’m amazed at your persistence. 🥄
Maybe we can talk about how the California government, including Newsom, have explicitly allowed PG&E to pass along the fines for their responsibility in the fires and being convicted of manslaughter to customers. And how this has made the penalties for their criminal negligence meaningless.
You can literally block instances as a user on Lemmy and have been able to do so good quite some time. No need to run your own instance.
What do you expect Democrats to do without a Constitutional majority in either House of Congress, and in none of the 3 Branches?
Show any semblance of desire to help their countrymen? Not vote in favor of confirming right-wing extremists to the administration and judiciary?
They’ve so far refused to do anything but capitulate when they have a majority or a minority.
Yup. The context on this is directly profiting off of others’ work, not setting data free.
I agree with you there. Context is what makes it theft and using the stolen data to attempt to directly compete with the source is where the actual harm occurs.
In a scenario where the source of the data is not being harmed, it’s hard to think of it as theft (data/information wants to be free).
It is stealing in the same way that profits are stolen labor. The AI company stole the labor of those who prepared the summaries without compensation then, used what they obtained to directly compete.
I am in agreement with you here, at least ideologically. I think that IP law needs a massive overhaul because data “wants” to be free. The major problem is with the context of the hyper-commercialized landscape that we currently live in.
That’s literally not what the ruling is about. It was about an AI bro company using proprietary, copyrighted materials to train its AI, which they obtained by questionable means, after being denied license to do so by the IP owners. Further, after training the AI with unlicensed materials, they launched a competing product.
Whether you support IP or not, the AI company is clearly in the wrong here.
It’s a pretty definitive example of many AI companies being little more than leeches, stealing others’ work and repackaging it as their own. All with zero long-term consideration of “what do we do when there’s noone left to leech off of because we undermined the ability of those make the source data to make a living, while unnecessarily driving increased emissions and consumption of potable water for something that provides little actual value do humanity as a whole?”
Yeah. I’ve been so removed from that stuff for so long that I forget the terminology.
As for overkill, depends on how their acceptable risk profile, number of printers, and types (FDM, resin, pastry, etc).
Fair enough. That’s long enough of ownership that resale would likely be impacted. Getting into debt at this juncture would indeed not be recommended.