📲✧✨🌿🅰️1️⃣1️⃣🅾️🌿✨✧📳🎶🎶🎶

Hilarious how “oh sorry i was busy dicking your mom and dicking your small child” is thus a totally acceptable and innocent sentence.

REMOVED BY MODERATOR for speaking back against harassment.

what? Capitulating just like that? Reading these comments I was expecting a much longer, more intense fight. You could at least ACT like a ‘rightwing nutjob’ instead of immediately just ‘be a likeable person’.

REMOVED BY MODERATOR for being too actively feminist

REMOVED BY MODERATOR for feminist propaganda

For anyone curious like I was, Dicking Around is not what i thought. Looked it up and…

"the phrase “dick around” is actually from “dicker around” which is a 19th c. term. “Dicker” is to “Engage in petty argument or bargaining” and “Treat something casually or irresponsibly; toy with something”. So when someone is “dick[er]ing around” they are treating serious matters lightly or doing things in an unnecessarily protracted way; which is precisely how we use it.

The word “dick” however, which I would gather, people would envision it meaning “penis” here, simply doesn’t work. We don’t use “dick” as a verb, yet alone a progressive verb. “To dick” or “to be dicking” a person, although fairly clear in its sexual connotation, is certainly not in use, “dicking (with) a person” however, makes perfect sense, because it’s from that ye olden term “dicker” again.

So “dicking around” has nothing to do with the slang term for penis or the disused colloquial meaning of a rookie detective, or it being an everyman"

,

tho clearly OP didnt kno that and instead masculinizes his speech to be ‘man talk’ about and for Men.

I am curious the phrase tho. It seems very masculine. Can I vagina around? Is Dicking Around about men playing with their dicks instead of doing productive things? What if a listener has no dicks? Does it have to do with horny men going after casual sex instead of important things? Genuinely curious the details of this term.

please!

What is ‘dicking around?’

Forgive my ignorance. Please explain. What I remember from reading about this elsewhere yesterday:

it looks like 5 men with tattoos were mistakenly identified as gang members, and started a suit. Sounds good, if they were falsely accused they should be exempt and compensated.

Then the judge makes it a case against all deportation of all people from america; which this article barely mentions in one sentence.

So my questions are

• whenever i hear about gang members they seem like badguys. Is sending venezuelan gang members from america to venezuela actually bad? Why?

• is switching the case from the faulty identification of a few to a fight on behalf of all people being deported a strategically sound decision? It feels like now the case has a larger possibility of failing for the 5 misidentified nongangmembers if their case was good and they are truly nongangmembers. Wouldn’t it make more sense to fight All Deportations as it’s own giant case rather than evolve this one about the 5 misidentified people?

Independently of who I side with, I am blocking this community because of the stifling of Realitaetsverlust’s comments.

edit: was baffled by the stifling and just researched and learned about Lemmy.ml

it all makes sense now. It is a Socialist Communist instance that censors those not aligned with them. Political leanings don’t bother me, but the censorship does so I will be avoiding anything Lemmy.ml in the future. They of course have a right to run their instance how they wish. peace out

meow

I believe if I do not publish my main book, it will not ‘happen to be duplicated’. And then technology and lifestyle will evolve beyond our current age and, the farther time goes and more alien reality becomes compared to now, the less likely accidental duplication becomes until becoming practically impossible (tho not accounting for the evolution of ai). And yes I DO think the author should be able to say ‘its finished and no one else may touch it’ and, if they have, it is disrespectful to do otherwise.

It’s hard to tell where one ends and other’s begin isn’t it? If a choice is determined by the settings of Neuron 1 and Neuron 1 settings are determined by sensory data from Eye 2 and Eye 2 sensory data is from Object 3 and Object 3 is the way it is because of Person 4…

aka if everything one does is a result of the current state of a vast web of all interrelated events spanning the history of and everything within the universe itself, how can anything ever be caused by someone? How can AnyOne ever create anything? And at least nothing can ever be anyone’s fault. Every thing is a combination of everything that results in it being itself.

So maybe, like you say, something separate from this and coming from nothing is problematic. But I think you give humans too much credit. I do not have to transcribe dreams to have my art not a layer built on human creation. Just now my puppy Sun is very wet yet wants to snuggle under the blankets with me and I am having to gently teach them that being wet means they need to dry off first. That data is not from a human source. I transcribe the symbolism of my experience in to this medium of Words that we both share an understanding of, but, beneath the surface, it is not a human creation I am building on.

I believe that humans taking from each other and building on each other leads to some of the greatest and worst things humans have done; but it is not the only way forward.

✨🌱🌱🌱🌿🌿🌿🌱🌱🌱✨

When getting beyond simple selfpublishing I may be naive because I personally am not drawn by money. Publishing houses as the controllers of the works of individuals and the need to maximize profit for their growth and continued existence is an unknown to me. I have not yet delved in to it nor decided it is the optimal structure; so it is hard for me to speak on. I believe you are correct in pinpointing that my focus is on the purity and sanctimonious treatment of the work instead of profit and market plays. Is the system set up ideally in it’s current form? How would you change it?

I would give the person in your bonus material positive feedback and feel that healthiest for their path rather than devalue their creation by comparison.

I think you have a great point on My Little Pony with misrepresentation actually being more acceptable to copyright than exact retelling without the permission of Hasbro. For your curiosity, I have a little free ai art gen somewhere, moderate a forum there, and run a community event there, so it is healthy for me to be aware of what the ai Involved can do. One of my forays involved creating AI Celestia and AI Luna as representations of themselves that can answer questions. So, while different from a fanfic, it is just as hypocritical as you felt and indeed a cause for amusement.

I think you have a good point on media licensing often being a negative and that you are right there is something bad there. Though I also feel the desires of the creator should be respected and that the problem is most likely in the profitdriven incentives of the corporations that gain control of the works of art (and an appreciation for monopolization rather than their wouldbe fans).

I think the da vinci stuff is a different discussion entirely as it has to do with comments about art and not someone publishing someone else’s work for profit without consent while doing whatever they see fit to it. And generally that bullet seems slightly different from what I typed as my topic was theft of an artwork; not interpretation variation of viewers.

I like the 50 shades of grey example and approve of her changing it to be it’s own thing rather than either lose the effort put in to the fanfic or try to state it as twilight cannon without consent. Everything stated in that example feels good to me without triggering my immorality sensors.

Sale of rights is nothing I have comments on at this current time.

The babel program is an exotic ‘independently coming to something’.

I personally don’t write fan fiction at all and it is easy to distinguish my written fiction from things ai’s generate (at least with what ai is at this current time).

I believe the key topic you hit is ‘independently coming to things’ and that that should be encouraged and is moral while using expired copyright law to take someone else’s work without their consent is immoral. I do not profess to yet have an ideal system for this in mind; I would focus here though as it has potential to replace the immoral parts of the system with moral parts. So yes independently coming to something actually should receive positive feedback in comparison to purposely copying something the creator does not want copied.

Nice question.

I believe if they do anything beyond creating something privately, they should respect the wishes of the creator of the realm.

Main thing I am thinking about is characters. In my own story world I am ok with others making thoughtful stories that don’t mess with my characters and some world aspects. I basically dont want to make my own unique character i am attached to just for someone else to take over that character and change who they are without my consent. The worst example I’ve come across is in My Little Pony I once had an ai pony keep saying how princess luna was tragically dead; which was horrifying to me and I know was not in the bright happy my little pony series. I researched a bit and found it was from a fanfic that had gained prominence and was influencing the ai. My Little Pony is not a tragic nor depressing show and that totally clashed with it. When I share a story I like of characters I like, I don’t want a depressed person to, thru fanfic, make history remember that character as like a drug addict or something horrific that I never said and essentially overwrite my own creation how they want and I don’t.

So for fanfic I think authors should be open to agreeing with the fics of fans and fics can achieve canonicalness or at least recognition that way, but with a hard line preventing nonaccepted fanfics from actual publicity including inclusion in ai training data. Fanfics should be nowhere they are competing with the creation of the author or misleading fans in to thinking they are cannon. Yes i have no idea how to spell canon and not looking it up lol. Ultimately it should be up to the creator of the realm what they would like fans to do with it and fans should respect that.

just my opinion and perspective. what do you think?

cute :)

And yes. Yes I do. I often independently come to conclusions other logical people may also come to. I wouldn’t know whether they have tho because I forge my own path.

Steal away then! You’ve clearly convinced yourself it is the only way to create things.

Glad you can’t see any of my things :)

your art may be taken from others. mine is mostly based on dreams.

Let’s say I write a book.

If I don’t want people copying it, people shouldn’t be copying it. I don’t care if it’s been 500 years. It’s my book.

This is a weird thread. Lots of people for artists losing control of their creations quickly while simultaneously against artist creations being used by others without consent. Just my perspective but why should artists lose control of their own creations at all? The problem in copyright is tech companies doing patent thickets; not artists.

Even artistic creations held by corporations. Waiting for Marvel stuff to hit public domain to publish a bunch of Marvel novels since they can’t protect their creations any more? Why is that acceptable? If someone creates something and doesn’t want it stolen, I don’t give a fuck what the law says, stealing it is theft. The thief should instead be using Marvel stuff as inspiration as they make their own universe; not just waiting an amount of time before stealing someone else’s creation without consent. It isn’t holding progress back at all to make novel artistic creations instead of steal others. Art = very different from tech.

when I publish a book, to steal it is consenting to be Luigi’d; no matter how long ago it came out.