Should Elvis really be vilified for liking blues and rock music and playing it himself? How does that hurt anyone?
Like should we be pissed at Django Reihnhardt? Or R.A The Rugged Man? What about Japanese bagpipe players?
Should Elvis really be vilified for liking blues and rock music and playing it himself? How does that hurt anyone?
Like should we be pissed at Django Reihnhardt? Or R.A The Rugged Man? What about Japanese bagpipe players?
This should be higher up
Solid puns but this is actually a problem. Beehives are quite valuable, like $500 per hive or so to just straight up sell them, or obviously they can also be incorporated into an apiary for long-term production.
Theft of beehives is really not unheard of. Similar to how people steal cows and shit. Beekeepers will sometimes brand or otherwise mark their hives in an attempt to deter such thievery.
Personally I keep my beehives in huge steel cages, though that is primarily to protect them from bears.
I suppose it isn’t linear but I suspect going from massive insane explosion in numbers to an 80% loss in a matter of weeks is pretty unusual. I think that growth was largely driven not by hype but by the automatic linking with other Zuckernedia properties.
I’m sure you’re aware that the manner in which legal bureaucracies define terms is a form of jargon that differentiates legal language from actual language.
They have separate categories of laws to deal with them because physical property is different than intellectual property. The same reason they use a different category of law to deal with identity theft.
That’s your opinion. The contrary opinion would be that copyright infringement is the theft of intellectual property, which many people view as of equal substantiality to physical property.
You can disagree with the concept of intellectual property but clearly there’s an alternative to your point of view that you can’t just dismiss by declaration.
It doesn’t matter how you recreate an image, if you recreate someone else’s work that is a violation of copyright.
Stealing someone’s style is a different matter.
Well said. Copyright is whatever, but the disrespect shown here is remarkable.
Indeed.
I’m afraid that even laws aren’t the root cause. I’m pretty concerned about the infrastructure we have allowed to be built around us, and what we will continue to allow to be built going forward. Even if we had strong privacy laws, laws are fickle things. The only thing separating us from full on Orwellian dystopia is some bad policy changes, the technology is already in place and we bought it on purpose.
There’s so much more that bees do, too. Managing hive temperature (as to be exactly 36c), collecting pollen, nectar, propolis, and water, cleaning the cells, removing dead bees, dealing with infections, raising drones…
Bees are cool.
Your logic is flawed in that derivative works are not a violation of copyright. Generally, copyright protects a text or piece of art from being reproduced. Specific characters and settings can be protected by copyright, concepts and themes cannot. People take inspiration from the work of others all the time. Lots of TV shows or whatever are heavily informed by previous works, and that’s totally fine.
Copyright protects the reproduction of other peoples work, and the reuse of their specific characters. It doesn’t protect style, themes, concepts, etc. IE. the things that an AI is trying to derive. So like if you trained your LLM only on Tolkien such that it always told stories about Gandalf and the hobbits, then that would be a problem.
This is so funny
EDIT:
😆 😆