Harrison [He/Him]

The same thing except you then have to pay for the disk, distribution and worry about stock and so on.

until you have a library that you can rent games for free close to you.

It’s called a torrenting client

Better mod tools and more quickly

I had a similar experience. Loved it then, like it even more now.

The units of time we use come from a bronze age civilisation that used base twelve instead of base ten. They’d count on their hands using the finger joints of one for single digits, and then the joints of the other for multiples.

The cost is just money in this case. It doesn’t use rare or unethically sourced materials (at least if you’re not a vegan), it advances the biological sciences as a whole and it’s something to do for bio grads that might generate a lot of value for society in the future.

Yes

deleted by creator

>The program might have required skill to write, but that’s not an excuse for it to threaten entire industries.

We don’t live in a world where industries exist just because it would be nice for them to and people need work.

An industry is a productive environment that creates products for others to buy. If the people buying from the current art industry care about human inspiration and the uniqueness they add to art, they will continue to buy from humans. If they do not, why should the state use it’s monopoly on violence to cripple any other source of product?

Are artists some special class of people above every other group of workers who’ve lost their jobs to automation?

They didn’t say trace. A good artist can use the style of another artist when creating a new work.

>The ability and willingness to generate images in a style associated with a person, without consent, is a threat to that persons job security and shows a lack of value for them as a human. As if their creative expression is worth nothing but as a commodity to be consumed.

You can’t own an art style. Copyright only extends to discrete works and characters. If I pay a street artist to draw a portrait of me in the style of Picasso, I’m not devaluing Picasso as a person.

It sucked for candle makers when electric lights were adopted. It sucked for farriers and stable hands and saddle makers when cars became affordable for the average person. Such is the cost of progress.

This is true in US law but it should probably be noted that a lot of the “misconceptions” you’re outlining in OP’s comment are things that are legal in other jurisdictions

Once you display an idea in public, it belongs to anyone who sees it.

Art is a part of the human condition. Whether or not it can be commercialised, it will endure as a past-time, just not as a vocation.

The rich and powerful must go away, or everyone else will suffer.

Soon enough they will succeed in eliminating most jobs, and the moment will come where action must be taken. Them or us.

Artists don’t own their styles, so it’s interesting to see them fight to protect them.

The only thing that makes anything valuable is that someone wants it, or at least wants it to exist. Nothing has intrinsic value because value itself is a human construction. This necessarily includes art.

This aid is not charitable. America needs to maintain its hegemony to continue benefiting from it and Taiwan is a critical strategic asset.