Otherwise, what's the point. However, if the work is political, religious, or economic, and you can't separate that, this is completely understandable on some levels. It's more the general side of things that should give you easy separation between art and the artist.

Unrelated but relevant, most of these people who are deleted from existence by AI chatbos are ones who can't separate reality from fiction. I can do this just fine, as I learned how to distinguish between the two.

[–] running_ragged@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago (8 children)

If the work is being commoditized to promote harmful ideas, then no matter how good the art is, it should be shunned.

If the art is good but the artist used to have problematic views or opinions, then that’s different.

[–] AskewLord@piefed.social 1 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

there is no such thing as a harmful idea.

i think you mean 'there are ideas i don't agree with and i don't think should exist'.

[–] running_ragged@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Any idea that if actualized into government policy, that would lead to increased rates of harm for people, is in fact a harmful idea.

[–] AskewLord@piefed.social -1 points 4 weeks ago

ok, so now we're talking about government policies, not ideas.

and only policies that 'harm' people. whatever harm means.... because i'm fairly confident every policy has people it 'harms' and those it benefits. the question is who and how...

load more comments (5 replies)