@adiz@opensuse and they're showing a blatant disregard for the people who they probably could probably use a lot more of, that being artists. Its no secret that the open source community is severely lacking in designers and people who are competent in a creative field. If you don't want Linux to be known as "that one operating system that has all of the programs with terrible UX", I recommend that they stop using ai for a catch-all for volunteers.
@ioletsgo@wetdry.world It's not like they're throwing an art exposition here, it's just a post about contributing to the distribution. It's the equivalent to a pamphlet booth giving out chicken nuggets. This ain't a red-carpet event here. @opensuse@fosstodon.org
@adiz@opensuse its lazy and piggybacks heavily on the creation of talented creators, its like rolling up to a car show with a Little Tikes while acting like you're an equal.
@mint@ryona.agency I've already accepted that my job is going to be automated in the next 20--50 years. Sucks hard. Honestly, we, as a society, are going to have to really reevaluate shit and figure stuff out because a lot of people's jobs and the economy is going to be in jeopardy. @vultumast@wetdry.world@opensuse@fosstodon.org@ioletsgo@wetdry.world
@adiz@opensuse@ioletsgo@vultumast Indeed. I just don't think drawing furry porn is a real job, it's in the same league as streamers, influencers and other talking heads on social media. Lucrative, yes, but the bubble is ought to pop sooner or later.
@ioletsgo@adiz@opensuse Isn't OpenSUSE a free, volunteer-based project? Draw them a picture of a chameleon then for free then so they have something better to use.
@Hoss That's fine as long as all proprietary software is burnt to the ground as well at the same time.
In a surprising turn of events, the main thing retarding proprietary degeneracy is rms's hack on copyright, ensuring that a lot of free software is kept free by ensuring that proprietarizing it for profit is a criminal offense (although enforcement is usually handed as a civil issue, with nobody being dumb enough yet to not comply with a court order to provide the source code).
If free software was to lose this defense, very bad things would happen.
@ioletsgo@adiz@opensuse@vultumast >basic disrespect for >a humanitarian desire to keep stuff moral Blud what does this even mean lmao copyright is not humanitarian or moral and just stifles actual creativity and promotes corporate techbro monopolies
@adiz@opensuse@vultumast Shutterstock watermarks appearing on countless ai generated images proves that ai takes materials it doesn't have the right to use, not only is this a violation of, y'know, copyright but also a basic disrespect for a humanitarian desire to keep stuff moral (which is a reason i think techbros should be required to take humanitarian training before doing shit like this)
@jihadjimmy The problem with that is that the only legal framework that allows copyleft to work is copyright.
I don't often write copyleft, as that term has no legal significance and I believe few people who read "copyleft" are aware that it's copyright, but with hacks to ensure freedom rather than to take it away - so I prefer to state that the software is copyrighted, but proprietizing it is not allowed.
If people acted semi-rationally and refused to accept proprietary malware as a substitute for software freedom, proprietary software would eventually disappear without a need for copyleft or any other similar legal framework, but of course not.
I like to make the distinction between hacked copyright and regular shitty copyright by calling it copypeft. What should disappear is copyright, but copyleft must endure.