iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Replies

Jacquelyn Gill @jacquelyngill.bsky.social · 15/10/2026

Wow, I just learned that there are people who think copyright is an unequivocal evil and artists should give all their labor away for free, which like, yeah, sure, maybe if we had UBI but we live in the world as it is, do YOU work for free? No? Cool. Don’t make me turn off the comments, ISTFG.

25101542 0

Jacquelyn Gill @jacquelyngill.bsky.social · 15/10/2026

Two last points: 1) you can criticize copyright as a model and still not think it’s okay to get rich from stolen labor. If you think the central criticism of Altman is he violated copyright law, I don’t know what to tell you. Copyright is just the imperfect mechanism we have. The victims = artists.

329222 0

The Ephemeral Tao @batwingcandlewaxxe.bsky.social · 15/10/2026

Copyright is an artifact of Capitalism. It is a bad solution to a worse problem. The only way to eliminate copyright is to eliminate capitalism.

100 0

Steve Peers @stevepeers.bsky.social · 15/10/2026

The point is the hypocrisy, surely? I mean, you can argue 'copyright is sacred' or 'copyright is theft', but you have to pick a lane. 'copyright is sacred except for tech bro billionaires' glorified toasters' is not a serious position.

140 0

Jacquelyn Gill @jacquelyngill.bsky.social · 15/10/2026

2) The scientists whose papers Swartz downloaded were already paid. We’re paid to do research; we aren’t paid when papers come out. The people you pay to access papers are publishers, which often have a bigger profit margin than Big Pharma. So the two are not equivalent. Scientists were not victims.

740940 0