820
Generated "art" does not rule.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
820 points (100.0% liked)
196
17443 readers
684 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts require verification from the mods first
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Lemmy when discussing health care: Karl Marx
Lemmy when discussing creative works: Ayn Rand
It would sure be cool if all art could belong to all people.
Sadly, as long as we live in a profit driven system, there needs to be a way for artists to claim ownership over their work.
I don't see how people think this is any sort of slam dunk or how it could go against leftist principles.
It would sure be cool if all health care could be access by all people.
Sadly, as long as we live in a profit driven system, there needs to be a way for doctors to make money from their work.
So... Sounds like the health insurance companies, the companies that buy and redistribute intellectual properties for profit, and the general for profit systems are the problem?
How do less popular artists support themselves if they can't sell their intellectual property?
How do they support themselves now? Usually by having another income stream, or not very well...
Though I'm not suggesting they should give away their work for free. I'm saying they should maintain rights (and consequently royalties) to their work.
Regardless, we preferably would remove capitalism outright and work towards a future where artists can pursue their art for its own sake. Everything else is a bandaid.
And no one on the left is advocating for a system where doctors would not be getting paid for their work under capitalism.
No one on the left is advocating for work under capitalism.
Huh?
You can advocate for a different system while also acknowledging that things can't be ideal right now.
I don't know if Marx would disagree with individual artists owning the intellectual right to their artworks.
And if you asked Lemmy about how long copyright should last, I doubt that Ayn Rand would approve.
Everything's just a retelling of Gilgamesh anyway, why bother protecting "originality"
Yeah, let a small number of billionaires to steal both the work and job of artists, then flood the market for art with poorly made mass produced garbage, because some idea guys are still pissed off about his artist and programmer friends not teaming up to make him GTA but set in his hometown, with VR support.