@theartguy Here's an article from the EFF that is surprisingly in-line with the way I think about it:
I don't think you do need to say you "own" your creative work to be able to say that others can't legally copy it
And we might not want to think/speak in terms of ownership because the wealthy and powerful have been grooming us to do so in order to more easily subvert the public good for private gain
Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world?
It was a disaster. Then we added microtransactions and in-app purchases.
@suetanvil The EFF has a pretty good discussion of why lumping these different laws into one is problematic.
scarcity pol Show more
the end of scarcity looms like a tide, held back by bluebloods and their bulldogs. no one needs to starve or freeze or die, but they demand it. they will it. they want it. food rots and homes lay empty to preserve prices and profit; a freely replicable and ever-growing body of media and knowledge, unprecedented in human history, suffocates in the white-knuckled grip of rentists. it doesn't need to be this way. we do not need to do this to each other. there is enough for everyone.
A new low in #academia: Southern Illinois University attempts to recruit "zero-time, volunteer" adjunct faculty for instruction, research, and advising.
Why is it raining?
I specifically requested yesterday's weather forever
You ever think about how progressive DS9 was making Nog and Jake canonical boyfriends in an open, polyamorous relationship?
I wrote a rust program to optimize SVGs.
Problem is: it optimizes them too well.
By which I mean: the program doesn't work and it just deletes the entire text of the SVG.
Very small filesize though so I guess there's a bright side?
@mbbrown I was being snarky about The Free Market mostly being used as a rhetorical prop, as you picked up on
E.g. someone saying "the free market will decide what the price of drugs should be" when drug markets are one of the most regulated markets possible
This happens a lot
But to be really pedantic, it's hard to think of any markets where prices are driven by demand and supply without regulation
@theartguy If however, we keep in mind that "property" is just an analogy (not a very good one) and all we want is just a legally enforced incentive for the artist/author/drug developer/software company/etc. to do the work in the first place, then it's much easier to think about balancing the interests of all involved.
@theartguy If it's property, then the rights of the artist/author/drug developer/software company/etc. are the only relevant ones, and it's hard to say where those should end or to come up with a principled line where you can say "no, you can't extend your rights any further." After all, if it actually is property, it *belongs* to them. What grounds does anyone have to say what Pfizer can or cannot do with this drug that will save your life?
@theartguy We both (probably most people?) agree that independent creators should get attribution and fair compensation for their work.
My problem is that the idea of Intellectual Property as a real thing is invoked in ways that purposefully confuse a number of very distinct issues, and it's better to think of it as a legally enforced incentive than as property.