Dr. Moose

Exactly. It’s clearly net positive for our society even if it can be cringe just by the sheer scale of religious oppression in the world.

If atheism forum ate a baby every day it would still be a net positive because people on Lemmy forgot that religious freedom and freedom to be an atheist is not viable in big chunk of the world.

Thats why so many atheist converts become such zealots. Imagine growing up in what essentially is spiritual North Korea and discovering freedom for the first time. That’s where many of these cringe atheist memes come from.

You’re saying that from a privilege of living where atheism is acceptable. For many its not and its a powerful tool for resisting religion.

I do find it a bit distasteful sometimes but I’d disagree with you here. It’s a support group and the only way to wake up society to absurd flaws of religion is through community conciousness.

I don’t think this precedence will ever get set because we don’t have universal global IP protections. The west will never set it due to fear of China winning the AI race.

In their opinion (which I agree with) this is the greater good and someone’s mastodon posts or similar being fed to AI training machine is a lesser evil compared to losing technological advantage to the biggest authoritarian state in the world.

Listen man I’ve been working with web scraping for years though now I do the exact opposite (anti bot tech) and robots.txt is absolutely meaningless and there’s zero precedent in the US or elsewhere of it doing anything but providing web crawlers a map of your web site.

I can tell you the thing we tell to all of our clients - the only way to sue bots is to sue for direct damages not for automation. This has always been true and will continue to be true for foreseeable future in the US because you its impossible to set a precedent here as there are just too many players involved that benefit from web automation.

You can actually check out:

• Meta v. Bright Data
• hiq labs v. inkedIn

These cases are very recent and huge in web automation community and went all the way to the Ninth Circuit and settled at Supreme Court in favor of bots.

I’m telling you man copyright is so ruined that it’s really just a machine for feeding middle managers and lawyers. But hey it gives me a great job security and I can afford to work on actual free software which as you might know is invredibly hard to fund otherwise!

Well it depends on the use. If its a movie that I copied then I can watch it, if it’s a picture I can print it and put it on a wall at my home. Even AI training currently its considered to be entirely legal to train on copyrighted data. You can even parse copyrighted data for analytics which is entirely legal as well.

So you can do a lot with copyrighted data without breaching the copyright, including AI training as it’s the article topic.

Those are entirely different laws you’re thinking about like DMCA, EUCA, database protection laws (yeah lol it’s a real thing) etc. Copyright on its own is about distribution.

That being said data law is really complex and more often than not turns to damage proof rather than explicit protections. Basically its all lawyer speak rather than an actual idealistic framework that aims to protect someone. This is primary argument why copyright is a failed framework because it’s always just a battle of lawyers and damages.

No, there are several types of legal agreements on the web in this particular case there’s:

• click wrap where the visitor must explicitly agree with terms of service by clicking a button - that’s what you see when you register an account.
• browse wrap where the visitor implicitly agrees with ToS by just browsing the web.

The former is enforcable while the latter is almost impossible to enforce in free western countries because you just cannot agree with something just by browsing a public space as that’d be crazy.

No that’s not how copyright works. Copyright prohibits distribution not copying.

No it doesn’t because all mastodon data is public and does not require ToS agreement to be collected.

Mastodon could only argue damages but that would be impossible to litigate in any extent due to decentralized and free nature of Mastodon and Fediverse. Except for some backward countries like China or Japan where there’s no information freedom protections and any corporation can sue you for damages for any information infringement (even if it’s not yours).

This is a good thing. Mastodon shouldn’t control anything related to the legality of data flowing in the fediverse - that’s the entire point.

thanks for sharing these cool wasps! We have some very interesting ones here in Thailand as well and I’ve seen them dig trenches just tossing sand around half a meter up which just shows how crazy strong they actually are so incredibly don’t doubt those stings sting

I just learned about solitary bees a few years ago. For some reason it has never cross my mind until I was researching these unusual blue bees in my garden which turned out to bee Blue Banded Bee which is awesome:

https://www.fotocommunity.com/photo/blue-banded-bee-flight-karthikphotography/27046849

What really triggers me is that digital products that are significantly cheaper, easier and safer (environment etc) than physical counterparts have significantly worse rights and protections.

Even if I agreed with the idea of copyright the economical implementation is so absurd.

You are right if it’s a honey bee. There are many other species of bees that do have males with stingers. For example many solitary bees (live alone rather than in a hive) have stingers though aren’t known to sting people unless swallowed like in the OP.

The British isles have over 200 species of solitary bees so it’s very possible the bee hero in question here was a male :)

Could have been a male bee too

Yeah isn’t that crazy?

Copyright by itself only protects distribution but then laws like DMCA (US) and EUCA (EU) make drm removal illegal. Its hard to believe that these laws exist and should be opposed at every possible opportunity.

Can you imagine buying an ebook and being told you can’t remove malware from some strings of text or you’ll go to prison? Also you have no consumer protections like refunds or ability to pass down the license so you’re literally have worse consumer rights than a physical product and digital data costs nothing!

The current copyright framework is so broken and so toxic it needs to be completely destroyed.

And people say LLMs will degrade our collective knowledge lol

everything is open source except half of all things.

Lol

It looks like two worms split running from another tinier worm. Makes you wonder what it has done to be so feared

Economy of 1800s and economy of 2025 is not even the same thing. So what does this factoid even supposed to mean?