allo

As a main communitymember on a site with chats used by a huge amount of kids, I have seen how the internet makes it very easy, compared to oldentimes, for pedos to be in areas high in children. One of the kids there often complains about pedos and asked me to help remove them. So, with kids being a defenseless flock of animals, there ARE kids who then take a Defender role and they become the ouster of pedos. Also noteworthy is, right before I emailed an official pedocatching organization, the kid I was helping got in a confrontation and spilled the antipedo plans; which alerted the pedos and spoiled the plan. So the issue with kids doing high stakes things is they are mentally still children.

overall, pedos in kid areas, thanks to the internet, feels, to me, also on the rise. And those areas SHOULD have the pedos removed in an organized acceptable fashion; and that that doesn't happen causes some Defender kids to think they need to do it themselves.

imo get better real official pedo prevention measures up in kid spaces to reduce vigilantiism.

thats from an old unused distrokid account. i hid songtitles cuz they are noob songs. Too bad phone has no easy way to just censor the middle column so i can show the entire thing. 1 cent per stream is good. for as bad as google is, Youtube red and youtube are among the best for amount paid. A bunch of services in china, india, africa etc its like 1000 plays for a cent. spotify is also on the cheap side and takes 5 or 6 streams for a cent. There is also often huge variation within the same service. A youtube ad may be 1 cent for a song and then 0.1 cents for the same song. country may play a role.

anyway, havent done it in forever but about to get back in.

i forget what tidal is like and that artist account didnt have anything catch on tidal (nor anywhere else. was probably my least effective artist account ever).

idk ive seen some crazy complicated stuff woven together by people who cant code. I've got a friend who has no job and is trying to make a living off coding while, for 15+ years being totally unable to learn coding. Some of the things they make are surprisingly complex. Tho also, and the person mentioned here may do similarly, they don't ONLY use ai. They use Github alot too. They make nearly nothing themself, but go thru github and basically combine large chunks of code others have made with ai generated code. Somehow they do it well enough to have done things with servers, cryptocurrency, etc... all the while not knowing any coding language.

Hilarious and true.

last week some new up and coming coder was showing me their tons and tons of sites made with the help of chatGPT. They all look great on the front end. So I tried to use one. Error. Tried to use another. Error. Mentioned the errors and they brushed it off. I am 99% sure they do not have the coding experience to fix the errors. I politely disconnected from them at that point.

What's worse is when a noncoder asks me, a coder, to look over and fix their ai generated code. My response is "no, but if you set aside an hour I will teach you how HTML works so you can fix it yourself." Never has one of these kids asking ai to code things accepted which, to me, means they aren't worth my time. Don't let them use you like that. You aren't another tool they can combine with ai to generate things correctly without having to learn things themselves.

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.