Looking within licensing guffaw witin the knowledge economy 🛋🔎

Does nor exist, economists log off. There is the knowledge domain. What they ain't is a scarcity of knowledge. Such a scarcity with what is able to be searched today.

Such a dubious concept, along with the attempt of an intellectual monopoly and monopsony. As if thought can be controlled. Such a matter with idea's concepts and style that are too broad to be categorized with a thing.

This brings a division, on how these matters where tutors tell other artists to use reference, yet not when it comes to copyright, our that such a matter concerned with its own withering and the means to monetize.

These are the alternative laws with regard to displacement with others, with defendants can in regard to maximalism of licensing laws.

From Alix Aviles* second video.

Oh dear, looks like it's going to be a combination of AI and Copyright, yet with such licensing laws there's going to have to be a reimagining with them. Or circumnavigating them, as it merely will make fan iterations impossible.

Copying non-commercially was forever a practice within classical academics, I've done sight size method myself as a manner of teaching Copying were to mean to bring design patterns and their aesthetic axiologies into a new repeatably and consistency.
Copying will help transform and merge

A scientist goes does deep down of the ideology of libertarian, western thought - pro capitalist thought left behind via Ayn Rand. Well, I could draw a line down there, Adam does not know how that from Steven Jay Gould and to the moment of our technocracy of yearning for a sense of control, a matter that transcends copyright and the licensing laws of the ownership to our attention and the control of it with our attentional facilities

That reminds me when it's comes to AI within the idea of making our own ideas with controlling the conversation, aiming for the outsider.

1:34 hours (Yeah there was criticism where the sponsor previously, yet welcome to the machine of entertainment that we live in. )
*Anywhere, here's the vid

That's curious, that was a different definition of accelerationist, (Maybe he's using a different definition which I don't hold. The direct action plan sounds well, though. Also with something off-base with certain sources such as Mark Fischers miserablism.

It's all.. Mild and inoffensive, though, all things considered. Even with the direct action strategy.

Yet the legal battle, I can't really join in that circus.

(This one is on my to-read list, so many on the bucket list.)

Tom scott also did a video in regard to other work

Patricia also did a video in regard to understanding the licensing laws. It's not going to be easy.

Well, imagining other means such as a right to the city and other means of direct action is a anarchist methodology of accomplishing that's also suitable. Also, the handshake deal that is taken for granted. Such as a simplicity on that with a written agreement.

The copyright industry complex. Urgh. Why are so many willing to die on that hill?

Has our licensing laws every been pro-worker? Look at those perverse incentives.

As with the naturalistic reductionists with what happened with religion, so will there be a trend with our own licensing laws. What I also dislike about this reductionism that it reduces all aesthetic energy to how much will commodify it, the get-rich-and-famous contract. Something wiggling inside me is telling my that's not art.

So, to confirm.

LLM and Diffusion models are remixing tech that's mindless and iterative to our designs. Only through the deal that ain't contingent of NDA's and several escrow payments and paperwork, we could do work or anti-work that makes a difference.

Thoughts...

My editorial:

I tend to prioritize fraudulent behaviour than ontological perfection of IP/Copyright. John Lockian property rights are a liberal conception that can lead into petty sport of the printing press. (Even John Locke opposed monopoly, btw)

I don't like either the diffusion model training data and copyright. It's catnip to industrialists because they are about faster and cheaper product.

I'm currently doing more journalism within the legalese stuff, this gets quite

 editorial and even into political and economical matters.
Never underestimate the simple, direct transaction over complex.

Since property rights are easier to argue from an industrialist due to capital, it's only a matter of not playing their game. Only a different game and system that the independent not dependent of the commercial industry.

( Oh and if they decide to content ID this article on Goofy being incredibly hot, they erm I guess I told you so. Guess entertainment ain't an amorphous blob. )
Guess I'll have to preserve it here for great justice.

I guess this is a matter of taking a deep breath. Along with focusing on the main struggle. I guess that's enough of this hornets nest of da industry.

All rights reserved is an outdated licensing term btw. Bears repeating

S***s AI Udemy Review, and other clarifications

(I'll never sketch myself as the nostalgia critic again, and it's not even a coherent expression because it's old stuff, yet.)

Time to describe a bad decision. Following from Seth's Claude Dog Post , I've deliberately postponed this review.

Short version: I've tried my best to not make this an entertainment spectacle by making it into a format video with bells and whistles. Course I took is off-the-mark, and I don't recommend, I then think more about Licence quoting a Cryptography guy and calling it. Due to the illiteracy of licensing, I had to rewrite my TOS.

Longer version

I bought a course by Seth. I'm not convinced with my wabi-sabi tendencies.
I buy it so you don't have to! I'm going through my disagreements and snorting book reviews. Maybe out of parasocial relationship, I've decided to buy his silly course on AI.

Welp, Here are 35 pounds discounted. I could not resist. Most interesting was building a career without AI. Comparing it with the weather and the species like Kevin Kelly. Yet here we go with a another movement I cannot predict.

Then I was recommended of Midjourney and Claude from Seth, and to put it on Youtube, youch. I haven't been into perplexity as it was.

With the ideas here, I'm certain that he's going somewhere here with a workable plan. He had going with something with productivity and value and why others must go and be impresario. A leader and not a follower (ain't that what entrepreneurs do?) Yet, urgh. It's still 85 quid now of this writing.

Axiological arguments of value creation do not apply to a Taylorist Industrialist, by the way, I think he notes that himself, yet that means that with are own urbanism that we are inter-meshed now it's a subject to be explored. That he did within his song of sigificance, 

He then goes into tasks and projects, within how that such a thing will be driven my freelancer cobbler automation and that clients concerned about productivity by the industrialist would as Henry Ford, those are thoughts are another time.

He claims lawyers certain professions aren't gone out of in five years real estate broker, truck driver, a pharmacist, a daycare worker is inconceivably not going to be replaced.

So now I cover with better uses of what techno-domnion and techno-affliation with such a mindless thing, he draws on deterministic free will and Daniel Dennet's Intentional stance. Oh, He also makes a claim that people don't go to Hackneyed Movies from Hollywood any more, I get not courting their opinion. Yet, Disney get's traction.

What can happen with this though is Seth's attraction with determinism as a position compared to Dennet's Compatiblism in regard to interpreting free will when it comes to comparing this tech with autonomy.

I ended up writing the review. (It's going to be licence ramblings from now on. Already done it.

"As a wabisabi illustrator, Independent. The implications of using AI have reached wildfire within anti-ai, I hope copyright cases get turned down because being into creative commons licensing, attempting to out-license it ain't going to work. It's nice to see somebody try to cool the flames down.

It's inevitable that in our times, though, I guess illustrators are either going to embrace or walk the opposite direction.  Impresarios such as us.

I mean, What will happen with disconnection of this day and age. I do hope that there going to be more essays that don't muddy the waters.

Brings me back to Niel Postman's Technopoly, that's such a thing. What the implications with our own designs such as it will pursue the conflicts here. You're thoughts on Henry Ford are poignant.

Thanks."

Got my Certificate, eh, yeah. There's that credentialism that's apparently I have to show now. Ugh, Udemy.

Am I supposed to be proud?

Further notes.

Technopoly out of all the technological books, this felt the most relevant to what's happening today. Even with the last two. This was, despite the disagreement western bias of Cold War terms, eeriey similar to Alex Avile reported on within the second video.

Well, thanks, I guess. I don't think AI-philes will get much, AIphobes will get average with the end with Seth's plan for those who plan to not build their business with it average, cannot fully recommend. He does summarise his ideas in his next post, hmm.

Hmm. Time to revise positions again. Judging from my previous notes.

Considering Steve Klabnick has a similar to mine, with being wary'n technological puritan. Not a Tech opportunist. I'm simply not the industrial bottom line, not Disney, not Nintendo, not King who managed to lay off its employees.

Oh, It's still generative Ai, well that could be a marketing term right now. Now for the last notes.

. Jumping in bed with For-profit companies for content ID is not going to work, a nightmare system as it is. I'd wish they call it copyright infringement, but everything is loaded with RFAA terminology. It is even argued that it ain't the case, the push to make fair use and fair dealings obsolete to apparently control the diffusion models and LLMs. Trying to marketize style will only consolidate power.

Again, licensing tends to encourage monetize/marketerize-or-die kind of logic, which I'm trying to avoid.

. Environment is a loaded gun, none of the essayists or pundits than Alex Avile, fight me on that one. I'd have to limit my micro-blogging after this. Bluesky and Xshwitter aren't going to be deliberately misinformed licensing.

. Education and connections with controlling tech have been noted with Peter Thiel. Along with certain reaction streamers championing it (not all). They should not be taken seriously anyway, anybody who takes thou opportunist ambulance chasers are confirming Neil postman has said about Amusing ourselves to death.

12 minute video, apart from the thing, this is going to move towards a hyperreality. How it is malicious theory to control with aimless categorization and normalisation as the maths cannot be determined by those who preprogram it. I mean Alex Avile has already touched on educational programs who happen to use with the Khan Academy.

This is a question for future generations, and the ones that will come afterwords.

Merely shows how what's at stake here.

Maybe I'm drawing a close parallel to the postmodern villain that Video's Team wrote. Copyright will end with Disney wanting to license our thoughts.

Lets hope for copyright-gate by the sovereign citizen types

(Futurama with that the ad-creep on dreams)

I'm agreement back to Flippo

"Unpopular opinion: the pro-copyright anti-information freedom response to generative AI is reactionary, and it’s bad in all the usual ways reactionary things are bad.
The tech is here to stay. The only thing being decided as a matter of IP law is whether open models will be a thing, or if the big rights holders will get to make a lot of money by licensing proprietary models. As before, I prefer a world where information and tech are free and accessible.
Like, I understand "I don't want to be put out of a job" but I really don't get "I want the tool that puts me out of a job to cost $159.99/mo from Adobe who licenses it from Getty, so I can rest easy knowing it was not trained on anything I made". IP law can deliver the latter, not the former.
Right on cue. Perfectly legal licensed training data. For OpenAI, Midjourney, and Google. Not for open source models folks can hack on and run locally. (If the copyright maximalist doctrine prevails.) All the downside, none of the upside. Yay for copyright!"
He points to this link https://www.404media.co/tumblr-and-wordpress-to-sell-users-data-to-train-ai-tools/

So I pour it, the course and the discourse. I'll leave looking at the AI entertainment channels next time.

Diffusion model ethics to Broad brush

I investigate into the lands of the beep boops.

Previously on Couch Gregor's ai editorals. Since I'm dissatisfied with all the editorials, I made my own.

Looking at the coco workflow, there's the usage of noding and shaders here like it's used within blender, with 3d models.

Huh, according to the questionable lawsuits there n has been ethical questions in regard to this, I've had to check what this will do for independents.

Looks like it will have to relax and into noding, with minimal text-to-prompt speech, I'm afraid such a matter will move towards no copyright infringement. The environmental concerns along with the labour is another matter.

I can still see some inconsistency here and there, i think it will.

The only answer to this will be to do another art piece.

Since copyright licensing laws aren't going to stop this ( Disney has been developing its out diffusion models for to replace to concept artists.. ) Such a matter that copyright infringement it out of existence, it's going move into ethical questions with regard to its use and not contingent on commercial publishing and industry.

Licensing politics! Yeesh. Have they slapped me with a copyright infringement from drawing an Aggron as a pin-up, perish the thought. I'm merely a content producer to them anyhow.

This book is on my audiobook list in terms of essays. So many coming out these days. Got the audiobook.

( Oh hint, my untested estimate is that I agree with 80% percent of the book, it's good at dealing with the transhumanist thought that's been erupting more within Silicon Valley and the saviour complex.)

 With the rise of deepfakes will continue to occur, along with the 

The age of scepticism is going to get more muddy. Herschel Gordon Lewis had a point with direct response rates

Disinformation campaign first, funding latter.

Going to have to boost this as such tech evolves, Fox Key did make a post that this will continue since films are the most labour-intensive and expensive forms that we take for granted. Including videogames, and such a licensing that will only move it underground, along with managing.

I'm not sure if we can out-license of with this will combine to some odd concoctions, I don't like this I.P loving people, (Even though I can imagine a system of resource redistribution not contingent on it, merely like how qualitative differences between a restaurant and a soup kitchen works. Does that make me a anarchist? Oh, well. )

It's not that the lowest common denominator word of content means the worst and the best. Bill Gates definition versus Martha McLuhan definition.

Welp, I'll have to keep track as these things unfold, and soul-searching will occur. This broad brush will see more erm, cases, so to speak. Both Industrialists and the silicon will be watched.

(Also it's copyright infringement, not theft, RFAA implanted that. )

Hbomberguy comment

A big bucket of copyright and it's murky depths.

Of course, I've seen hbomberguys new video. 3:50 hour documentary. The way he covers how the angry video nerd became a content farm, and how the internet historian hidden past and how he built his audience over trolls. Pass on that audience.

This documentary has honest reporting, with my own views of AI. All things considered.

You know, it's important why these content farms and hacks exist in the first place, despite the hollowness. They commodify streams of attention to measurable result for the direct response mass advertiser. These statistics are why they get the email and will continue to do so. Business have to continue, the show must go on and so forth, (as Harlen would say within the Glass teat.) The Flows of traffic that go before us with all the activities going forward.

So it's better to create something with honest, professional practice including the marketing. Those samples within the documentary aren't the case. All these determined streams of attention, all will pass, it's better to build something ourselves.

To quote a direct marketer Herschal Gordon Lewis which the ones who plagiarize ignored:

"Lying isn't necessary If it ever becomes Necessary, Let's all do something else for a living."

Now it's time to review what I've written before.

• Copyright/trademark is always the most fluid law, ostensibly it's meant to protect the specific expression. Yet it's been abused by big business to cripple freelancing/small scale business. It's a paradoxical law where it can't be applied selectively; it's universal. Otherwise, it won't work.

• I could establish further enforcement, yet at the same time that'd give big business a means to cripple. Then that's a no-go. No artificial DMCA takedowns, please! We've seen what happens when the music industry does it for streams. Is Hbomberguy right in this categorization? (Edit: bomberguy did hint at this at the start of plagiarism detection, so points there.)

What's the difference between plagiarism, copyright infringement, and fair use? What does it mean to publish to work in a realm of the internet arena? This question will continue to be asked because it's still open.

Now that, I'll know there'll be natty or not when it comes to my own work.

So the point of this comment, it's likely there are going to be further cases with this battleground.

Appendix:

What I've said about copyright. Seth has covered it within his podcasts, I generally agree. Especially as he's covered the part that's covered with Harlen Elison's rant of paying the writer. I have to quote him, because this blog is a yoink and twist of his format.

Anti-art and anti-business/Questionable cases

 Previously on Couch Gregor's journalistic notes on Gen AI.

Clickbait! Clickbait and Grifts all around like we are in the trenches! It's time to hide and try to make sense of it.

This attempts to clear some of the fog, despite certain talking points being made.
This one is alright, even if it attempts to separate predictive AI for social media and including generative AI. It claims most of predictive AI on social media hit prediction is bunk and that alot of the scams there are where the snake oil is.

Yet it goes into why it uses text to speech long with other certain evolving tech for clarity.

3:10 hour of the most charitable understanding, along with certain questionable cases that are misrepresenting, I'm not acting as a proxy for Alex Avile.

This is the most accurate take, despite the postmodernism (which I don't like. Foucalt, grr ) Now, it does read between the lines on that Case while happening to not simplify something. It's simply not that simple with such cases like that. Oh, some ideas are not contingent on the measurement of currency.

It's becoming more apparent that with our desires, that even with the efficiency argument and the environmental concerns beginning to surface.

These are the ideas that may get me called out for being anti-business or anti-art, simple because I find a case that supports Adobe AI models and Disney's Ai Models, an indefensible inconsistency. It's why I've tried to listen to others, including the sceptics of the anti-ai. Why would you consider yourself a defender of a class with that backing?

Regardless of things, I try not to be too technological determinist about it, there will be capital and another day of work to do.

Do yourself a favour and don't read the comments, even if I did. Merely noting a Marchell Duchamp taking from Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven.

There are multiple sides to this AI debate and conflict, so I'm going to continue my essay archaeology.

Not into the postmodernism, can be ignored yet his copyright alliance ip-loving maximalism which seeks to increase displacement and artist erasure.

I'm not relating to the justifications of it all.

Yet that's not the intention of advertising, it's to repeat like a frequency till your "accountant tells you they're bored with it." Now it's more of hiding heads in the sands, and with the complexities unresolved.

Creative or 'creative' Pundits have been disappointing, to self-defeating cases, and towards to ineffective noise filters that don't work on current models, no glaze or bulls***. 

I'm going to have to leave this for more coherent words, not another quietism and heads in the sand. With the Luddites that have lost, we have to see if we can at least remain technically literate.

"watching artists advocate for stricter copyright law is insane, to me. you are wrong!

these kinds of people hijacked the whole deal. it sucks. its going to turn into "being anti-copyright law is pro-AI and anti-worker" lol"

I don't think these class interests have oversight to be representive, I'd like more critical thinking with our own ideas.

I have to agree with that sentiment, people have got there funds despite archaic laws, even though I know there are lawyers out there that are good people. We have to come to terms of it. I don't think that's it's defeatist, rather than reassessing my terms of assessment.

I may be called anti-art and anti-business, as things have been previously done. Yet, reading between the lines is something I have to do here. I don't want to live in a complete permission culture, there are always going to be conflicts.

If the confusion of permission and remix is still forever, then nothing will be accomplished.

Technically literate, the best kind. Can't wait for part 2 by Alex Avile.

(Post edit Avile proceeded to post ) Slopification has already happened when he pointed at Defen village. )

Here's my Comment.

"Thanks for this, my thoughts... Remember Elsa-Gate? There was already slop within the gaps to quote 'feed the algorithm/market', such a system of romantic individual creativity could be made, yet as such an extent of the sloppers, the masses don't care and YouTube. Almost like being in our own niche places, where the internet was designed without the intention of advertisers, the commodity fetishism of it all, there's still community to build. So is the idea of Neil Postman's amusing ourselves to death when it comes to politics, journalism, education and religion and made to be liked, aaah Dough Ruskoff, within his documentary to be liked. There was already hacknification and hierarchal relationships with the creation of our crafts. I do it myself when it came to it my own sex work. It's like everything is being illuminated, like you said. The fabric of our serviceability being natural in of itself, not so in our systems. 🛋💭"

It's not like I'm defending Elsa gate or that, it's merely how others don't pay attention to their out mechanisations provided with the financial incentives.

Such as it I don't think the Defen Village as the same as such as the other industry complex, we are seeing it more now.

(Oh, I have no intention of debating this maximalist positioning, regardless, supporting Disney/adobe copyright with their AI models is not within their interest, and not within my purview of debate. There is a growing preprosterism. The less the art enterprise looks like the free market enterprise separation from crunch culture and sigma grind sets the better. I guess some)

Let's leave these cases. Permission culture out of the aesthetics of ideas, concepts and style.

Lines in the sand, Generative/Derisive AI

Gurney written about it, Seth Godins, written and podcasted about it and others within my circle are having their takes. With Patrick Willems.

50 min documentary on Ai Along with a several minute read of Colin of the Bloodknife

Hopefully, this is going to be my own point of view. Nothing things from before.

The market, and the way the attention shifts, new trends and technological shifts are occurring.

Image generating search engines, and the need for an endless supply of content, whatever hackneyed to keep the show of going on.

I'll never use any of these images, myself reminded of the handcrafted pottery, and it's wabi-sabi imperfection, it can't be entered within a computer. The artwork and the process ain't there when I typed it up, it's average, middle of the road.

Romantic to the wabi-sabi crumbles back in my days.

I'll be alright, with my professional non-profit stuff, what's the problem is there's going to be others to understanding the grassroots process. Getting in those fingers raw.

It's here now, from chatbots to the like. What there will be in terms of work for free and professional work will change again. Jobs are going to be shuffled. Making sustainability solvency will mean difference once more.

Seeing copyright is going to be reinforced again by small businesses and commercial illustrators. It's a universal law where the copyright trolls will have a field day. Is this what creators should do? Build careers suing others? We don't want big wigs, from Disney, Warner Bros, and Sony making a DMCA AI detection system an over illustrators style, or a writer's voice.

Already, the seeds have been planted by adobe. The enemy of my enemy, ain't my buddy.

An AI detection system that will cut off Artist's living like that audio detection on twitch, youch.

From my the mutuals of my other account.

Not gonna bang on for amateurs for playing with the new tools. Neither am I going to fully publish any AI stuff without giving it the one and only edit, (then, it ain't artificial) It can only summon mass, the general mean. Mediocre. Something that a quirky couch cannot be replicated by. 

Maybe it will interweave with new ideas, in the coming years. Only as a tool to get into the creative juices. Not the other way around. So there has to be an interweaving with it.

Copyright and trademark or one of the most double-edged laws, flexible and hard to be grasped, empowering it won't be good. Fair use will be tested. The content tug between if our ideas will be cannibalized or fair used will occur. Best to work through it, even as the amoral business models change.

Don't get any funny ideas on what they will do with this.

What do my characters think of Ai/Copyright?

Ai

Bopkin and Castella will endorse it, Bopkin an opportunity, Castella a means of confusion. Crump Marcy will look at the funny blur and get think it looks cool in a dizzy kind of way.

Bopkin will be in bed with that, wanting faster and Cheaper, like Doctor Robotinik. He'd probably shove it into a get-rich-scene and then fail
 
Rubarb and Muddel will be in the Dark.

CG encouraged by Bopkin, George by Marcy, Theo and Asheal will be curious simply because of the noise it creates by others. Couch Gregor will be pulled in different ways by Jaime and Bopkin.

Danny, Trist and Jaime will be to most rebelious of it, Kyro will consider it secretly, and abomination. Vera will say those filters ruin her complexion. Dutton and Sucker will object, Dutton Tradition, Sucker becuae it succccccccccccks.

Licensing politics

Bopkin will love to extend copyright to infinity minus a day, and copywright infringe report children who happen to draw that he can't sell into the marketerize. Castella will like the things like they are having. Vera will with the misconception. Dutton Traditionalist will follow with Theo. Rhubarb, CG and George will be pressured in to dubious licensing deals. One into a loophole.

Muddel don't think well, Asheal won't think about it, Marcy will attempt to do it in her accounting, and then it will not mind whichever flows.

Kyro wants to have no business for secretive reasons. Jaime want's it abolished for anarchism, Danny will go into peer pressure along with Sucker Sam. Trist will move towards a punk underground, not following any of that.

(As for myself, suspension. Another post )

Fanart, derivative grey zone. License reductionism Talk.

 No, we are below notice. As with the Seuss case.

I did Aggron within a neato butt.

This is why I'm https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ including my blog, including my ideas. Disney and Nintendo are too litigious. With there flexible permissions and the remixes of fan art of prospered. 

I'm reminded that our licensing laws, as there fullest are full of controversy and disagreements, here's one I agree with Jimmy. Copyright, an obsolete concept, or something that may be undone by capital.

Oh my, the entire copywriting profession, being completely hackneyed, each is a vote for copyright, or a vote for the legitimising of such a system.

One of the reasons why I self-publish.

I'll continue. What I've learned from licensing that people, like libertarians, have a market fundamentalism view of that only artistic energy can be placed within the desire of making money, oh how easily measures yet naive. Also, that's not art. Not even the conversion rate an executive makes, well, that of the work's exchange value is reductive in of itself.

Work schedules, crunch culture, sigma grind set, Criminalisation/decriminalisation of sex work/anti-work, sexcess, design theories and praxis, those are all the things a craftsman can discuss that don't need licence. Pro-bono and other charity projects are always there that can be done without permission.

Including the ontology of licence. Along with the witherist position. The licensing industry complex, yeash. Sustainability being a trained skill again.

( Oh btw, since capital is going to disintegrate licences due to jingling keys with it's David Foster wallace Infinite Jest that can be played on doomscroll is qualitatively different from establishing a community that prioritize mutualism and equitable, resource redistribution of the co-operatives will always be more beneficial. No from the reactionary populism this big companies have. )

Here's a 15 video by Shiddy kickflips with cussing, I need to document it here in case you missed it.

Next time! Couch Gregor will look within Comfy UI, the stuff coco was made from. 🛋🔎

Inktober/DrawTober Thoughts

Merely relaxing into the rhythm of doing work for me. Already did,

It's yet another trend where a stream of attention for people to pay attention to and to grow a following.

Everybody, what a stream of attention to grow a following towards solvency. I can afford to, with all the amount.

Even when the guy who stated cleared the copyright for the makers to sell their work, It's clear there's social capital involved to help capitalise on the streams of attention again. It's to show a little spot where the SEO lays, and that's it.

You are the product to advertisement product, and the attention economy is ontologically inseparable to the conversion advertisement these platforms support, with the prosumerism intertwined with its structure.

With the reporting on this, Mary Sue seems to do honest reporting. Oh boy, another copyright troll. Of course, into the antipathy brand which has mixed antipathy as a legal concept within legalese. I have mixed feelings of it being a useful fiction.

@KrossKritical

 Posted this meme in reply. Aaaah 🛋️💤

These short-term RFPs for internet traction will always exist, for the long termers who want to be sought out by name, they will always have to ignore it. I forget everybody is in the hunt for the newcomers, and it's target audience.

We are not 100% pure when it comes to these trends, either go in for the self, or the generosity of others. I'll most likely going back into the art-fights, due to the fun'n beauty. Yet self-sustainability is more important than from self-exploitation.

If I contradict myself, only if it's important.

It's a tactic, made to get hold of an audience's attention within these social media sites, it ain't for those who could afford strategy.

Intellectual prop nightmare

Even Ip is a hard to digest phrase

If the corporations get hold of ip monopoly, and ai dmca takedowns. That's a recipe for a toxic vortex. It's a bad idea, yet a good idea for a those selfish hustlers and the bottom.

All freelance endeavours will make moot due to the dmca take down of style.

It's better to make a contribution with the culture, indie style with crowdfunding than to sign all that away for a publisher who can demonetize on a whim. With its mercenary gang of lawyer's. Is that a battle worth winning.

Disney has been at the forefront of this, wanting to make copyright last forever.

The eclecticism and the rules need to be in place, not in doubt. If the value of quantified ip laws hold all. Then all amateur endeavours will be overshadowed all by vulgar commercialism.

Double-edged swordness is a lenient stretch of ip, that really is stretching it.

Social media cargo cults

Which is more productive, being ahead of the social media trends or being a better version of oneself?

Chasing popular, the tempting a-b tested power law curve.

A fandom, fan art. Its cover band work, if a fan artist was to publish their work, there's the copyright gauntlet that big companies wield. Although I do like to see stories of these characters, can only be derivative, unlike the risk of a fresh IP.

Making something fresh fan art that won't get the ire of a big publisher like this is like winning the lottery.

I do appreciate that character design takes on Pokémon, yet they may fall in this category. Don't do piracy, don't make cool character designs.

Social media grooming projects. Are what rich people do when they feel a crisis in their status roles on the internet when it shows there money don't mean much. Fun, yet not deep. It can be a profession, that can be separate or not from doing art, art creative work that matters.

Can a living be made with this? Sure. I can't blame others for following this path if it pays the bills, yet this is where one may seek better clients.

This brings me to my own social media account.

Should I decorate my couch-sona like a doll? With people who are unsure of their professional/amateur status? The infinity of free provided by the internet is so that they can make it, so one can charge for anything, including hobbies. Open an etsy shop.

Already I'm making revisions to my character design as we speak.

That includes chatrooms and meetings, writers and speakers charge for such matters yet beginners and amateur writers are there a plenty. It's free practice, there's included with these platforms. 

Yet it's not needed, despite what social media says.

Thank you

Backlash of hype cycle

More data for the skeletal hull of my OC Kyros, what to do.

Bogswollop meme on video essays. I've got more for you to follow.

Collecting vids for more thought on the AI.
 

38 min documentary, to help make a rethink. Austin has been accused by Style jacking by Hbomberguy, yet he's the content farm like everthing else who has to build an audience.

This is going through a hype cycle.

Technology trigger to the highest visibility

It's likely there's going to be another AI push after this one, because I've been using shading assistant on my own work to streamline the CEL-shading process (with varying clumsy application) as that the ai? Is using this spell-checker AI too?

The moment you templetize a process, the moment it can be put into AI. There going to have to be skills that can't templetized, then It'd be put into ai.

This is the matter of normalization, and the Artificial generation will go through the currents, interweaving with our lives once more. The constant debate of copyright infringement will still continue, with the arguments over social status and tenures being in question once again, instead of doing the work.

To do the work, with more a better tools to the creative Zeitgeist will remain. With wabi sabi rust that will remain.

1:06 hour of the driving cause of this, convenience being served with the business model behind it, with an obvious bad guy.

Another 22 min take on the rise of junk data provided by this escalation. Leadhead, the postmodern analyst.

(Edit, fixed the links. When editing this on my smartphone it seems to delete the YouTube videos. That's some new information.)

Threes Avenues of the story of price, along with should you pay to work for free?

Another dream.

This has come from Seth Godin's This is Marketing. Along with his thoughts on free which I'll keep insisting others to read it. With my thoughts.

1. Free Idea's that Spread
   
   Things that aren't tethered with a price that will push through the pathways of culture. Dealing with ideas that are both paradoxically both priceless and worthless. For example, The Mona Lisa is priceless due to the owner being dead with no royalties, but it's still worth it's salt.
   
   Memes/Jokes, Fan Art are all obvious examples of all those other things that help spread ideas, but not necessarily in that format. 
   
   "The problem is not piracy, it's obscurity" Tim O Rielly has put it so eloquently in this field. Ideas that spread, win.
   
   Awareness, permission, and trust are the things those excel at.
   
   
2. Expensive expressions of those ideas that are worth the price
   
   To handle scarcity, tension, and enrolment. This is where the price will come in.
   
   Enough to keep playing the game, and to do what one loves.
   
   The third way is not one who will put all their chips in.
   
   
3. Getting picked by a big publisher/celebrity; a gatekeeper
   
   This is work that one may pay to get the opportunity, Like Oprah Winfrey picking somebody for her book club to become a hit. Its effect will help spread those ideas and then some. This really ain't in any freelancer or influencers favour mathematically speaking. It could happen, yet no.
   
   This is Ellen Picking a fitness influencer to be published in her mega-show, giving him a car in the process, with the revealing over hundreds and thousands. Work on the short head of distribution.
   
   I wish the obesetobeast (John David) the best, along with his channel on twitch. He did not stare a gift horse in the mouth. Yet, do you want to rely on such wild circumstances? You have to pick yourself with cable television going away.
   
   Look at the contract, so you don't sign away one's copyright. Best know the legalese and taxonomy of law.
   
   It requires a gatekeeper with an immense amount of power for the creator to leverage. Yet the internet opens up. Cable television is being replaced.
   
   The publicity is expressing a point of view, probably to annoy the 99.9% who don't get picked. The opportunity is distinct, though, valuable exposure that glimmers on a oasis.
   
   I'd still recommend self-publishing.
   
   So that's it, three opportunities.

Ai art - a threat?

Kuroshi tries to express himself within his wasteland plane.

Compiling responses from Seth on artificial intelligence. James Gurney also has some posts, discussions have been firing up right now. Seth has commented on it.

Some things are in our favour, Regardless how much AI art advances. Objections that have resonated to me are:

1. Wabi Sabi
   Vinyl records are still in, when a blacksmithing does blacksmithing the natural, hand-made quality of it all brings novelty. It's how the old becomes new again. Old rpg game aesthetics walking into a realm of new.
2. Becoming the one and only
   Creativity and ideas are all the more important, bringing that individual touch that will make an art director not “Get me a generic book designer”. You want them to say, “Get me Chip Kidd, that book designer.”. Then you want them to say, “Get me a somebody who looks like a Chip Kidd”. Using all the processes of the disciplines and eclectic fashions. All the more vital to summon that creative magic.

Is it going to threaten our work? Including freelancers out there which I have my sympathy towards?

There's discussion of copywriting the prompts if possible, but I'm not sure how much that will satisfy copyright vultures like Disney. That's another discussion for another time!

All the more for the artist to make something that is worth sharing, and to make a difference. Merely having a style of specific expression is not enough, bringing their everything into the mix. Organization, leading, and community is what's going to be on his side of such a loving touch.

I'm going to keep making art and stories regardless.Tools and their advancement won't stop one to becoming a category of one.

Maquettes/LayFigures/Rigged-Animation

 I've been dabbling with technology with making the creativity an enhancement, with less of the procedure

Yes, I've been using digital tools to help my craft, I may be shooting myself in the foot because these are by-products of the commercial illustration Zeitgeist.

These digital lay figures, handmade maquettes and rigging to bring my ideas to life has been a tool. It's not like I was breaching copyright, yet now I'm dealing with a conflict and competition with the illustration industry complex.

I wonder if I'm going to jump the hand-made blender models next with grease pencil.

Advantages:

• Increase repeatability
• On-model Visual Refinement
• 3D dimensional playground
• Foreshortening Know-how
• Maquette formation
• Less Cognitive load

Disadvantages:

• Risk of looking like an asset flip
• Classical proportion tendency ☺ Can go limited in visual flavour of toony, graphic designy and anime aesthetics. Such specialised, specific models are needed if asked. Yet it aligns with my vision of classical-toony vision.
• Lack of straight ahead raw-directness. Nothing beats making something out of a metaphysical nothingness.
• Adapting my wabi-sabi touches will take getting used to.

It's not like the art police is going to arrest me and send me to art jail, all these tools and methods will all be placed, where the utility serves the user, not the other way around.

I know these may not necessarily be the one and only specifications I'm dabbling in, that won't have any satisfying answer. It's why writing will be another matter.

Thoughts on Ai image generator, bing Artificial generation.

A swirling of incomprehensible image water, others use it to try to reverse engineer and go down the gameable algorithm, others feel like it's a shock.

It's here now. The ratchet as been placed with the genie out of the bottle. Competitors in the business will be using to help move them to compete with customer/audience bases. Only a matter of time.

I've entertained it, it can't capture humanity and its themes, yet it's an algorithm that ain't conscious, it does not know how to steal. Only the hackneyed will of the master, not the wabi-sabi art of a creative mind. Mere pastiche.

Regardless, the lure of free was enough to try it. Won't paste anything.

I guess it's only good at one thing, mediocre and undefinable, all average stuff. Nothing I'd use to work in my work, only the summoning to make. This is the baseline average that Hollywood, and its entertainment want with our content I guess, to feed to the masses.

Detractors (from the biggest, the commercial illustrators.) of course are pointing that this is stealing, it bogs down to making a living and getting paid. This ain't it, chief. Even though the biggest supporters there are doing it exactly for that reason. Getting paid in money and exposure being their bottom line. Creativity with a capital C and Literature does not follow that.

It's so funny that AI art folks are like "my prompts are very finely crafted, they are my art" and then the prompts are like "photorealistic, insane quality, extremely detailed, masterpiece, professionally color graded, viral on Artstation, viral on Twitter, viral photo" - Dan Olsen

They want to make a go viral, make a hit and make a living, quick rich scheme it is. Over public domain art. Calculation for traffic numbers, all programming, all depersonalization.

There's stuff one can't reverse engineer. This is all reverse engineering.

What's threatening? A dmca'd detection system that take-downs art authorized by a bully corporation, who tries to copyright a style for making a number go up, that's something to watch for. They may do it. This argumentation for more IP power will be a slippery slope.

Couch Gregor and the of home-grown artists will do it the old fashion way, with AI helping streamline the process to make art, not the other way around.

Even then, the pattern of what it means to be paid to do creative work will shift.  They still will be couchmanity.

Ergo Omnes

* Pretentious warning pretentious warning *

 Such is a law that's delivered for all. Is this what the Kantian, that's universal delivered internally, along with such a ontology of consciousness treatment of categorical imperative.

It's why that they copyright cases will make rule 34 and fan art impossible. I don't know why the fan artist want to lobby content I'd abuse that they will suffer from, have we not forgotten.

Wow, it's like any complexity on the internet is going to be skimmed over and if it's not simplified into a BuzzFeed article, it's going to be ignored.

Ronald Reagan said "If you're explaining your losing" I think he means being indirect with that type of argumentation along that line.

With all things with the implications of such a law, only a matter to adapt.

Still it's a snide thing,

Crosswordism of epistemology: Susan Haack

Notes! 

Crosswordism, a conciliatory epistemological framework of viewing the world for out philosophy, of complete true justified belief. Yet here we are, some of here essays are good, some of them are not. Regarding Neurlanaysis and the overwriting of very within the language.

I gravitate towards Stephan Jay Gould and the mismeasure of man, along with Delusions of Gender as authority sources of Cordelia fine in regard to that. (I'll have to reread it.)

I wanna leave phrenology to the academics, I'm an artist/entertainer first.

Nobody's perfect with my wabi-sabism, So I take a bit from there, a bit from that. Now, such a visualisation of 3-dimensional epistemology is a way of reasons and clues being evidentiary experiences. Wow, she does like paradoxes, as do I within my fiction.

Well, that's ambiguity, that's a way to approach an essay or a fictional work.

Later she critiques the further industrialisation with academia and that's reflected or the orderisation and packaging of student into products that's a simple way with SAT tests, that later is the golden lining that brings with topics. Ad agencies lines of thinking that Seth Godin that has thought, or that he has to seek.

Attorneys being representation of advocacy rather than scientist being that of the pursuit of knowledge. Along with other distinctions, if you ignore thing, she provides a good framework for paradoxes and a 3-dimensional way of seeing discourse.

Trippy, man. Things for the philosophy are to be questioned, nothing is safe, from copyright and curious questions, a lot of questions, and then there's answers.

I'd recommend despite the odd bits.

Artfight platform Ruminations to license reductionism

Previously, Zei has retreated from art fight due to restrictions and, copyright apparently, or repetitive usage within boss fights. He had to remove it due to stresses now.

Oh, silly platforms, middlemen and the rent-seekers. Is this the case? What is this, is this the amount of ways that are made and that it's exposure again.

Exposure builds credibility (be it commercially), right? Or that's how it works through the public. This is the age within the Internet where there's infinity and free, what is there to license any more? Should we license? Paywall? Rhetorically, I answer here.

This was designed for one on one communications or small, viable audiences; the internet like a place like this.

Work means showing up on demand, in others terms and hitting specifications, a hobby is something one does to entertain oneself, like the YouTube poops. The hobby economy will still continue regardless, with new sites cropping up. Along with the shelf space like that.

Yet this is for the satisfaction of paying within one's own work forward, with minimal editing and interaction. That's supposed to be an art trade, some hours a day, drawing and done. Yet I can understand there are other commitments and bigger projects others could do.

Back to the struggle/share duality again, another choice to make. Can't argue with the free hugs guy, I'm a free hugs guy who does not give away licensed hugs.

(Going through the rationales)

It's non-profit and could be part of other education, so I'll give it that. The caterer gets front-page access, yet there's merely more braggability of doing other gift work somewhere else. Still that front-page space with a support to provide for the platform, the proprietary platform that I'm meant to entertain again.