pwnicholson

Oh, I’m not saying voting is the only thing we can do. Not by a long shot. It’s just the most impactful.

I feel that.

But just to say it: Because it’s still the right thing to do, and if we didn’t, it would just be that much worse.

There’s no denying the best thing people can do for the planet isn’t recycling, etc - it’s voting.

If you’re referring to Microsoft, they haven’t had anything to do with MSNBC since 2005, or the website site since 2012.

Yeah. It’s been a fairly common thing for decades. Counter programming during the halftime, encouraging people to flip channels. Puppy bowl on the animal channel is probably the most famous (and innocuous)

Business love libertarians. Not fascists.

Fascists and dictators might decide to take over your business, double the cost of your raw materials through tariffs, or suddenly change all your regulations without discussion.

Ask any economists what business likes most and it is certainty. They hate the unknown and risk. Even if the policies aren’t their favorite, if they’re fixed and stable, they’ll find a way to work them.

Literally a quote from the article:

“Not an anti-porn crusade, that’s absolutely not it, but actually understanding that for some people, a significant number of people, porn does lead to harms. And how do we actually begin to do something and address that?”

This isn’t some pearl-clutching religious group putting out the report. It’s a professional group of therapists.

The downside of not having any major corporation defend his IP for infringing on their profits is that you see tons of counterfeit Calvin stuff that is very out of character. Used to see more of it. Thankfully as the strip hasn’t been over-promoted, he’s not mega popular, so I don’t feel like you see it as much as you used to

They’re creating their own events, separate from the official Olympics

The article never mentions Australia. The reporter is from the American ABC. Everything mentioned here, including Disney, the $15 million, the reporter… all American.

No one here is talking about Australia except you

I don’t think mega corporations have been resistant to social activism only in the last couple of decades. It’s been true since at least the days of the robber barons of the early 20th century.

No, it’s not a different ABC.

Shocked Pikachu face.

He sold out to a massive corporate conglomerate and they don’t support his social activism.

Who could possibly have seen this coming.

ABC has been owned by Disney for decades. Are you confusing them with CBS who just went through a merger?

Many churches did back BLM and still do. There are actually many who actually read the Bible and don’t just listen to MAGA nutjobs and cultish leaders. They’re just not as loud (that’s kinda the point… The Bible talks about that, too)

I am one of the bosses. I’ve been around lots of businesses that do this kind of thing, including tiny startups.

I’m telling you for most businesses, if they’ve bothered to send someone on a business trip that costs $2500+ per person for an important reason, they aren’t going to cancel it over $250. That’s foolish.

The percentage doesn’t change for a team vs individual. 3 people also need 3 plane tickets, 3 hotel rooms, etc.

$250 is a rounding error for most international business travelers. That’s the cost of one moderately nice business dinner for 3 people. Between airfare, hotels, and meals, that’s less than 10% of the cost of almost all international business trips, with the possible exception of some quick jump from Toronto to Detroit for a lunch meeting.

Same for a lot of international leisure travelers.

This is a filter to keep ‘the poors’ away

As a photographer and the spouse of a writer, they are making massive profits off of a product that wouldn’t exist if they didn’t train it. By the very way the technology works, there’s a little bit of our work scattered in everything they do. If I included a sample of a piece of music in a song I recorded, or included a copyrighted painting in the background if a movie I was making, is would have to get a license. Why is this any different?

They should have done something more like a commodity license as it exists in music:

The composer of a song cannot prevent a new artist from recording a cover of their music if it has been previously released. The original composer is legally forced to grant them a license (hence “compulsory license”). But that license is at a pre-negotiated minimal rate. The new artist is free to try to negotiate a lower rate if the composer agrees. But the original composer can’t stop the new artist from recording a cover. And the new artist has to pay them for it.

Unfettered access is granted and the composer gets their share. Win-win.

That’s disappointing to say the least. I’m sure there will be a few more lawsuits as big publishers like Disney try to get their share of the pie.

The ‘pirating’ news from a couple of months ago was Meta, specifically. But I’m sure Anthropic did some too.

The issue I’ve always had wasn’t that they didn’t own a copy to read/reference. It’s that they’re effectively creating derivative works from that content, which they haven’t licensed for that use.

According to my understanding of copyright law (IANAL but I took a few IP law classes on in college) every author whose work was fed into that beast could have an argument that they share copyright in the derivative work that comes out of it.