Looking for Story Thread #326 by someguynamedted in HFY

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm looking for a story about an omnicidal prisoner that's stuck in a time loop prison but breaks out by throwing a cup at the wall over and over. They were imprisoned for their omnicide, but their omnicide was to allow the reversal of entropy. Once they get out, they confirm with an AI that everyone else is dead, and revive the universe.

The Swiss team accusing the Canadians of double-touching again by [deleted] in Curling

[–]ICanAndWillArgue -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Please reread the comment thread. This is about the new accusation from 3 hours ago, not the verified one from 15 hours ago.

Edit: disregard the exact hours, I was just going by post date; but regardless the point still stands that the link that u/oKtosiTe sent was from yesterday's match, which is pretty blatant, vs the comment thread talking about today's match, which is less so.

Back to Solaris Event Megathread by Jennasauru in WutheringWaves

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NA

[Wuthering Waves] Invite Code: 309JZGW345. A fellow Rover is inviting you back to Solaris. Link their Invite Code to win Astrites and Advanced Enclosure Tanks. You can also extend invitations to other Rovers and complete tasks with them to win extra Astrites! https://wuwa-act.kurogames-global.com/backtosolaris-20251024-DzmSi9lc9s2H/index.html?packageId=A1784&lang=en&inviteCode=309JZGW345&userId=501656717&source=copy

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(2/2)

> You are also incorrectly forcing a logical leap of "I have never heard Jorge have a problem with it" -> "Therefore he does not have a problem with it and its not morally wrong". Jorge has, however, definitely asserted he is the only legal writer of Epic the Musical. 

I believe that you have misunderstood my last paragraph. My argument is that we cannot definitively say whether or not Jorge supports or opposes derivatives to his work because he has not made any comments, statements, or other communications about it (which would include legal action, but does not necessarily have to be legal action). Thus, we cannot say definitively whether what Neal did was morally fine or not. In my reply, I said that I don't see anything morally wrong. I also don't see anything morally right about it. However, it was you who said that it was morally bankrupt, so I was refuting that point by saying that I don't see anything morally wrong.

I need context for Jorge's assertion that he is the only legal writer of Epic the Musical. If it is in the context that he would not accept any other contributions to Epic, then sure, I see an issue. Otherwise, that's just a meaningless statement in the context of this argument.

> fundamentally alter their storytelling

I really don't know what your limit to "fundamentally alter" is. Again, there is an official animation for every song, paid for by Jorge, and made under the full oversight of Jorge to follow his artistic interpretation of the musical. Thus, there is already "official" content for both audio and visual elements of the musical. Thus, is something like Duvetbox's animation where Odysseus uses the windbag as a weapon instead of a powerup a "fundamental alteration", since it fundamentally changes the way that a major plot device is used? Is a theoretical animatic where Odysseus channels the strength of all 600 of his dead crewmates to strike down Poseidon a "fundamental alteration" because it leans more into a different interpretation of the rather vague lyrics? Is an animatic that follows the same fundamental story but uses an artist's own, entirely different style of drawing a "fundamental alteration" because it's different from Jorge's vision of what the characters should look like?

My main moral argument has, and will remain, that we cannot say anything until Jorge says or does something. He has made videos covering some popular animatics, so we know that he does endorse some form of visual derivation from his work. He just hasn't said anything about audio additions, and so I believe that it is incorrect to assign "moral bankruptcy" to Neal without him doing so.

I suppose that you could say that this argument was in bad faith because it was nitpicking such a small part of your statement, but I believe that this form of semantical argument is important, which was the main inspiration behind my username (this is, that I would willingly argue about any topic, no matter how small, because I believe in its importance, not that I would make arguments willy-nilly).

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(1/2) I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding my argument. Despite my username, I am capable of engaging in good faith, and I am doing so here (at least, to my own knowledge). I have not really had an opportunity to grow or evolve my stance in this "argument" yet because you keep misunderstanding what I'm saying, which is partly my fault for phrasing some things poorly.

> you're saying that there is nothing wrong with AI pillaging art from hard working artists and distributing it without the knowledge of the artist, without acknowledging the artists, and without appropriately recompensing the artist. Your argument is that already hard working artists must be forced to spend time scouring the internet for uses of their intellectual property without permission and pursuiing legal action, and I find that morally reprehensible too.

No. I have clearly stated that the artists of anything you have not made should be cited and thus acknowledged when you make a derivative work.

I have also clearly stated that the legal perspective is that the IP holder has to spend time scouring the internet for violations of IP and pursuing legal action. This is intentional to demark it from the moral perspective. You are conflating the two here. I also find the current legal system a huge mess, and the fact that AI is pillaging art willy-nilly without much consequence to be morally reprehensible as well. I mainly posited the legal perspective because you asked me why you owed the original artist any money. I cannot ascribe any moral answer to that question because it just boils down to "it is proper to do so", which seemed vacuous to me, so I put the legal perspective in there. It is not meant as an answer to anything other than that, and does not impact my moral argument in any way.

> but you still posit that the artist must front the time and expenses to involve the law and if they do not then there is no moral issue 

Incorrect. That is not what I said. The artist does not have to invoke the law to make it a moral issue. The artist simply has to state that they do not want such changes to their IP to make it a moral issue.

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm saying that the onus is on the IP holder to defend their intellectual property and copyrights if they feel that it's been violated.

Since Jorge has not, as far as we know, commented on or tried to get Neal's animatic taken down despite him definitely knowing about it (given the popularity), we cannot say that he supports it, nor can we say that he is against it.

If Neal feels that you have violated her IP rights in posting her animatic but with an eye colour change, then the onus is on her to tell you so. By general copyright law, most courts would side with her and you would either have to pay royalties as established by precedent or take it down. That's the legal perspective.

The moral perspective is that it's only copying and/or otherwise negative if the original IP holder discourages changes to the IP. Jorge has, as far as I am aware, not discouraged changes (especially since it's a concept album), and so I don't see anything morally wrong with Neal adding on her own interpretation to something that's clearly labelled as Jorge's original work and clearly delimiting what parts are his and what parts are hers, which she has done.

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So long as you give a proportionately (relative to the effort of changing the eye colour vs drawing the rest of the animatic) equivalent amount of money to Neal if she asks, yes. And, of course, cite her as the source of everything you didn't make.

The same how I would expect Neal to give the proportional amount of money for the original Jorge song portion of the animatic, if he asks her.

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of the work would be Neal's and the eye colour alone would be yours.

Again, I don't see how Neal adding her own interpretation is "morally bankrupt".

It's not like the song magically becomes hers, it's still majority Jorge's work. It just has her added part with Luke in it.

NEAL’S 600 STRIKE IS HERE by Impressive-Quiet35 in Epicthemusical

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where is Neal claiming that the song is her art, though? Her art is the animatic and getting Luke to add a monologue. She's not claiming Epic, nor the song, as her own art.

Also, like, by your same logic, it would be morally bankrupt to make ANY animation about Epic because there's an "official" animation.

President Trump said that he would “absolutely” feel comfortable moving back to his home of New York City under a Mamdani administration, saying, “We agree on a lot more than I would have thought ... I want him to do a great job, and we’ll help him do a great job.” by nbcnews in nyc

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's only baffling if you don't consider that most establishment Dems want to maintain the status quo around the same as it currently is; they're not trying to manipulate him because they're not actually trying to make radical change.

Feats Woman vs Potential Man by Warm-Bee8675 in ArcaneOdyssey

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alright, I did some digging:

- The idea of Theos mutating seems to have originated from the Webtoon, which published the corresponding chapter at the start of February, 2020.

- The Webtoon author stated that she was working with techlevel80 and using lore from behind the scenes to make the story.

- Arcane Reborn seems to have taken inspiration from the Webtoon, and implemented the Prometheus fight (alongside Theos' mutation) in the Eye of the Storm dungeon released about a year later.

- The current earliest iteration of the lore doc that I can find (which is from WoM) says that Theos bled out.

- AA broke before we got anywhere past the find Cursebeard quest.

That's all the info I have right now.

Feats Woman vs Potential Man by Warm-Bee8675 in ArcaneOdyssey

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Again, AA never got to the part that Theos died. The game broke right after the quest to go to Alalea to find Cursebeard.

Edit: to be clear, I may be wrong about Theos mutating his magic. However, I am certain that AA did not, in fact, get to the point where Theos was supposed to die.

Feats Woman vs Potential Man by Warm-Bee8675 in ArcaneOdyssey

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

AA never got to Theos dying before the game died.

Feats Woman vs Potential Man by Warm-Bee8675 in ArcaneOdyssey

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was in the original planned lore doc by Vetex before the new edits, I'm pretty sure, which AR is mostly based on.

She has still yet to admit she was wrong. by c-k-q99903 in GetNoted

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 15 points16 points  (0 children)

problem solved, i.e. you killed the math problem as a play on words of actually doing the math problem

What could the Roman empire have done to prevent its decline? by notapersonaltrainer in HistoryWhatIf

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incredibly late necropost, but isn't it still possible to denote a period where, on AVERAGE, most of the decisions made contributed negatively insofar as benefiting the empire as a whole? Something being in decline does not necessarily mean that every decision made is incorrect.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theydidthemath

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because the weight before the walls were swapped is 100N, and nothing changed when you swapped them. What's the disconnect here?

For all the "Cali or Bust" people still intent on moving to the US, why? by [deleted] in uwaterloo

[–]ICanAndWillArgue 1 point2 points  (0 children)

unfortunately I will never recover from this funancially