Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I'll add:
"AI bad" overrides "Piracy ok", though. I've seen threads in the main piracy community where the general consensus seemed to be that copyright should be used as a weapon against AI.
Just a guess. Because piracy advocacy isn't about not paying, it's about not supporting megacorporations and anti-artistic business models. It's a form of protest, I suspect most advocates would buy media legally when it doesn't feel enshittified.
They would probably also support companies that used AI but did not fire workers as a result.
Because piracy advocacy here on the Fediverse is about that, yeah. You're saying the same thing I am, that the Fediverse's pro-piracy bias is "overridden" by its anti-AI bias.
It's the same thing. It's about protesting against big companies that hurt workers and artists.
Yes, exactly what I'm saying. People on the Fediverse hate AI more than they support piracy, because when there's a situation that involves both enabling piracy and helping AI they will side with the anti-piracy side in order to hurt the AI side. The Fediverse has more of an anti-AI bias than it has a pro-piracy bias.
Hmm I still think we're saying different things. Enabling piracy for consumers and rejecting it for big business come from the same beliefs. It's not about piracy itself or hating AI more than liking piracy. It's not about piracy at all but who is allowed to use it. It's about content being controlled by the public, and not corporations. I think.
It sounds to me like you're just saying why your support for piracy is limited in this case. You're saying "piracy's okay, but not when those companies use it for those reasons."
Having rules about who is "allowed" to copy stuff and for what reasons is, in a nutshell, copyright law.
Not sure I understand your argument, nor am I talking about myself personally, but folks I've seen on my instance who do. Actually I'm just a privacy and Flying Spaghetti Monster piracy advocate 😅
One who photographs a painting from a Walmart and prints it in their living room, and also boycotts a News outlet who underpays their employees is not more anti-news than pro-theft. They are both boycotts equally against capitalism.
I'm sure there are also many folks who pirate immorally, like from smaller artists, or because they're broke. But pro-piracy usually means in the boycott sense.
The original comment I'm responding to listed two biases of the Fediverse's population:
All that I'm saying - and that you are, as far as I can tell, agreeing with - is that in the situation where "piracy ok" and "AI bad" overlap the "AI bad" bias prevails. People who were cheering piracy moments earlier stop and go "no, not like that."
As far as I can see, you're saying the same thing. You're just trying to justify why you're saying "no, not like that." Which is not relevant to the basic point I was making.
You're both arguing anchored on hyper-reductive takes on what people think.
People who think "Piracy OK" rarelly think that "All Piracy is OK" (for example people who think Piracy for personal profit is OK are pretty rare) and similarly those who think "AI is bad" seldom think it's all bad (I have yet to hear a negative take on AI Character Recognition)
If one takes those two sentences as absolutes with none of that nuance and then extrapolates from such artificially narrowed premises, then of course the result will be ridiculous and contradictory.
I think your argument attempts to highlight a hypocrisy where mine highlights consistency but I may be misunderstanding.
If you go back to my original comment you'll see that I said:
That's the "Piracy OK" side, so yes, there is hypocrisy there. I'm reminded of the classic "what kind of woman do you think I am?" story.
An unfortunately apt analogy in its misogyny.
'A billionaire offers to kill a man, proposing a price paid to his family of $1 billion dollars. The moribund man says "sure!". "And what about if you pay me $1000 for the privilege?". "What kind of man do you think I am?". "We've already established that and are just haggling the price"'. A less misogynistic, less funny but accurate version of the joke.
Murdering criminals, we all agree on. Murdering the family man only works if he consents. It doesn't make him hypocritical or suicidal to reject a price.
If AI and media companies treated their employees well and offered fair terms for a subscription, the advocates would probably not pirate or boycott.
Again I am not that kind of pirate and I'm pro AI, but I don't think their views are inconsistent or anything. So anyways just my take but your stance is interesting too.
Copyright good unless it's major companies/brands whatever (basically if not indie = bad)
I'm not sure how true that is for the largest instance (lemmy.world) but apart from that it seems quite on point