Hayao Miyasaki is the co-founder of Studio Ghibli, a Japanese animation studio known worldwide for their stunning, emotional, beautiful stories and movies. At the core of Studio Ghibli’s work is a deep engagement with questions of humanity. About what it means to be a human, about how to care for one another and the world […]
It’s funny the largely anti-capitalist crowd doesn’t care about intellectual property until their favorite bogeyman shows up.
Then they suddenly “care”: whatever it takes to take down AI, right?
Even if it takes us down with it.
I don’t like weak arguments that try to manipulate our emotions with our favorite targets of animus, nebulous claims of threats to cherished values, misuse of the word fascism.
The person’s liberty to express themselves (even in ways we dislike with technology we dislike) is more important than an argument that rings false.
you threw in a red herring
Your moral hypocrisy?
The coherence of your “moral code”?
just to make personal attacks against me
Does it suck to be judged for the actions you’ve demonstrated here?
I’m also not here contemplating killing someone over dubious theft (of expressions!): that was all you.
when you are challenged you claim abelism
Also, whenever I come across it & feel moved: the casual inconsiderateness of online images of text is noticeable & easy to call out.
Instead of distracting nonsense, turning that useless online outrage & public shame toward something concrete we ourselves can address today (like web accessibility) might do some tangible good for a change.
Sustained long enough, it might catch on & make us more considerate in that 1 small yet noticeable way.
it’s really pathetic and gives differently-abled people a bad name. you should be ashamed of yourself
Does it?
Someone here should be ashamed.
If we’re done getting distracted with ourselves, the point remains that the article is a manipulative argument lacking substance.
Haters gonna hate.
Answered: that part you didn’t read.
It’s funny the largely anti-capitalist crowd doesn’t care about intellectual property until their favorite bogeyman shows up. Then they suddenly “care”: whatever it takes to take down AI, right? Even if it takes us down with it.
I don’t like weak arguments that try to manipulate our emotions with our favorite targets of animus, nebulous claims of threats to cherished values, misuse of the word fascism. The person’s liberty to express themselves (even in ways we dislike with technology we dislike) is more important than an argument that rings false.
Your moral hypocrisy? The coherence of your “moral code”?
Does it suck to be judged for the actions you’ve demonstrated here?
I’m also not here contemplating killing someone over dubious theft (of expressions!): that was all you.
Also, whenever I come across it & feel moved: the casual inconsiderateness of online images of text is noticeable & easy to call out. Instead of distracting nonsense, turning that useless online outrage & public shame toward something concrete we ourselves can address today (like web accessibility) might do some tangible good for a change. Sustained long enough, it might catch on & make us more considerate in that 1 small yet noticeable way.
Does it? Someone here should be ashamed.
If we’re done getting distracted with ourselves, the point remains that the article is a manipulative argument lacking substance.