ferrule

you kind of missed the point. your comments are based on an antiquated view of our life cycle. the problem is that there is such a disparity of income, and a work cuture of constant drive that many of us are so far upside down for kids moving out to change anything. between the constant inflation, income never catching up and having gone through two and soon potentially three resessions completely destroying our retirement investments, this is a generation that will work until they die. so the need for socialization now rather than later is important.

the problem isn't that this is a huge mountain to climb. it's that we are constantly running up hill and the fatigue eventually gets you. this is why people give up on being social. the benefits never outweigh the added stress. all you've done is dig your hole a little deeper.

i think this is why social media has such an appeal. it has a feeling of social interaction at the cost of selling you personal info which most people don't care about. you use it at any free moment with no commitment. i will see someone on facebook while sitting in traffic, they found a way to cram some sort of social interaction in where they could. unfortunately this isn't a substitute for irl social interactions.

you just need to keep a shit list of brands that are now dead to you.

Aside from the pandemic showing that half the planet are selfish assholes, I actualy miss being social. Thinking back on my childhood in the 80's and 90's my family could afford to be social. Going out to dinner with other couples, going to events, purchasing the nesessary items to be social like golf clubs, boats, grills, etc. There wasn't this constant anxiety of living paycheck to paycheck as today. I make more than my parents combined and yet after cost of surviving i am sitting on $5 for two weeks as my expendable cash. At that point I have no desire to go out with people as even the gas to get to them would need to be budgeted.

With money being tight I have found that i was always bowing down to work for fear of being replaced. I worked longer hours than I should have because I've always been trying to catch up financialy. Now that I'm in my 40's I've just accepted that I will never have that moment where I reach that plateau and I can take a breath. I will spend the rest of my life tredding water just keeping my head above it. And I wish it was the avocado toast argument boomers give but there is no personal expenses in my life. mortgage (ik I'm lucky), food, utilities, school loans, clothes for the kids and that it. My entertainment comes from the library or is pirated.

After having this daily stressor constantly pinging in my head I just don't have the mental capacity to deal with people. My partner is more stess than benefit. There really isn't any human interaction I have that is fulfilling anymore. I'm honesty just running on autopilot at this point.

you know by their definition of obscene the a huge portion of the bible will be thrown out.

i think that is a very important observation. people want to gloss over that when it might be the most important thing to talk about.

I'm wondering when i go to the library and read a book, does this mean i can never become an author as I'm tainted? Or am I only tainted if I stole the book?

To me this is only a theft case.

That sounds like a setup to only go after those you can make money from and not actually protecting IP.

By definition if your song is a hit it is heard by everyone. How do we show my new song is a direct consequence of hearing X song while your new song isn't due to you hearing X song?

I can see an easy lawsuit by putting out a song and then claiming that anyone who heard it "learned" how to play their new album this way. The fact AI can output something that sounds different than any individual song it learned from means we can claim nearly all works derivative.

So then anyone who uses a computer to make music would be in violation?

Or is it some amount of computer generated content? How many notes? If its not a sample of a song, how does one know how much of those notes are attributed to which artist being stolen from?

What if I have someone else listen to a song and they generate a few bars of a song for me? Is it different that a computer listened and then generated output?

To me it sounds like artists were open to some types of violations but not others. If an AI model listened to the radio most of these issues go away unless we are saying that humans who listen to music and write similar songs are OK but people who write music using computers who calculate the statistically most common song are breaking the law.

the slippery slope here is that you as an artist hear music on the radio, in movies and TV, commercials. All this hearing music is training your brain. If an AI company just plugged in an FM radio and learned from that music I'm sure that a lawsuit could start to make it that no one could listen to anyone's music without being tainted.

and knowing russians, he won't even respond to actions. they will need to remove him by force.

while i don't think it should be a moral issue, i think we need to stop trying to make this a fair argument out of some desire to be on some high ground here. what you described is fucked up and we should give them no latitude. it is theft even if they made the laws. the staggering level of difference in energy put forth versus compensation is ridiculous. When someone makes more in an hour than their least paid employee will gross over their entire lifetime...there should be no justification for the billionaire's existence.