I refuse to use the Brave browser, and I was prepared to abandon Firefox, over then-CEO Brendan Eich’s $1000 donation in support of California’s proposition 8 (banning same-sex marriage). I will never forgive the supporters of that proposition. I will not knowingly support their businesses.
I’ve lost all respect for Scott Adams (of the Dilbert comic strip) and Kelsey Grammar (Frasier actor). Their continued support for Donald Trump is damning.
As many have said there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and you can’t know everything about everyone, so no matter what you’re going to end up supporting something unethical at some point.
That being said, all I can do is act on the information I have, and when I learn about some situation like this, I don’t have an easy answer or decision flow chart. But I do ask myself two questions.
How much will my support enable more of the behaviour I find abhorrent? And how much will the knowledge ruin my appreciation of the thing?
I cannot read Ender’s Game even though I always meant to since I found out about Orson Scott Card’s politics about ten years back. And while there’s (somehow) way, way worse people out there the knowledge, especially the holocaust denial, just ruins any enjoyment I could get from the books or movies, regardless of any separate-art-from-artist arguments.
But I am a huge Lovecraft fan, and he was also just the worst. But the guy’s dead, it doesn’t matter if I buy his books or not. And even then despite his popularity across Geekdom he’s a relatively niche author. His views aren’t going to reach a lot of people.
I think this works out differently if the creator is someone current and powerful or influential. If we can blunt the impact of a popular creator spreading toxic views that prevents a lot more bad than than the same frome someone dead or niche. Even if that’s only lack of support, that’s still more.
I guess what I’m saying it is has less to do with the details of the bad views or actions, and more about much my support helps enable those. The less I contribute by watching or buying or clicking, the less I’m concerned about it. Unless it just personally bothers me.
I don’t if that’s the right answer but it’s the once I’ve got right now
Well let me just help you about Ender there - imagine an akschyaly clever kid, fedora wearing, huffing their own farts while being annoying on twitter and trying to suck their own dick all day. The image is a pimply kid almost reaching their dick, the cum blasts past their face and hits mein kampf on the spine, the kid goes into a crying diatribe about something.
I think that’s about it really, might have missed a part of the plot
I generally avoid giving meaningful contributions to chuds when possible. I was considering getting a Kagi subscription before, but upon seeing this that is no longer the case.
Have you boycotted JKR
I was never a Harry Potter fan to begin with, but if I were then I would be, yeah.
or dropped your opinion about Picasso
I don’t expect people who died centuries ago to be woke, so probably not. That someone like Picasso would be racist/sexist/queerphobic is a default assumption for me, so that already lowkey colors my perception of them when analyzing their work.
Is it about the general vibe of a product or piece of media, or are you more discerning? What goes into this decision and why?
It’s about applying pressure to provoke capitulation. I want to make clear to both them and everyone watching that being a dipshit in such a way will cost them resources and reputation. This is less effective when the creator is dead, though, so I’m not particularly concerned about their art.
You raise a really good perspective about the relevance of the artist among our culture. Older cultural influences have some significance but not the same as current artists in society. The relevance of problematic Greeks/Romans/Catholics just don’t have the same weight because we know they come from a different time and their art is a reflection of that time. If anything, it’s a sociological study of people from that time - we can still say the same for people today except for the fact that our consumption of their work can effect their estate.
Compared to current artists of today who are problematic - the likes of Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Kevin Spacey, Johnathon Majors, Roald Dahl, these artists are much more in line with J.K.R. than someone like Picasso (or {insert problematic writer from 1850-1950}, because their works are more immediately relevant to our current culture. I also think the intent of consumption matters based on how it is then talked about - is someone is consuming the media to get an understanding of the cultural feelings at the time, something that highlights aspects of society, or are they trying to live vicariously through this character and thus perpetuating it.
As someone mentioned as well, second-hand is a way to still consume the media without directly supporting the artist. I don’t think consumption of media is inherently supportive of the ideology nor does it have to monetarily support them, though I do understand that there is a high likelihood of sharing thoughts about something leading to others possibly purchasing and supporting them.
What these conversations always come down to me is how effective is blacklisting an artist? As in, does consumption of problematic works inherently perpetuate those problematic ideas or is it able to be discussed while highlighting them? I myself am conflicted here, as one of my favorite movie has 2 problematic actors in it, but Baby Driver is so damn good and having it on my Plex server doesn’t actively support the problematic people (then, nor does it support the good workers). So it comes down to how willing or how able I am to separate the art from the artist, and how I choose to engage with said media when talking about it with others.
Someone mentioned Joss Whedon who is another great (or, awful rather) example where his actions make it harder to consume his media. But Buffy is still and always will be a classic, and The Avengers is still a big moment. Those also happen to have a lot more people than just him working on them. But the same could be said for Roman Polanski, but I am on the side of the user who said his works should effectively be dismissed. The only case for something to that extent would be for film and social studies in an academic setting where all of the knowledge surrounding it becomes part of the conversation - as an example akin to this I think it’s important to be aware of and study American Cinema. Unfortunately by nature American Comedy has deeply rooted racism ranging from creating stereotypes that still are perpetuated today, to poor treatment of actors. And yet it’s essential that we study these else we lack the historical contexts that led to change. I think the same will be said a few decades from now regarding Polanski, where we aren’t studying his work his actions but rather studying the changes in society as a result of them.
We can study without them, but we will miss important contexts that are important dynamics. Without knowing about how trains influenced filmography the impact of travel films like Thelma and Louise are less impactful than they could be. Without knowing about how awful sex scenes in film used to be, the impact of modern sex scenes led by Intimacy Coordinators can seem frivolous. Without knowing the history of blackslpoitation films contemporary ones (like Black Dynamite) made in its image may not have the same weight. They can be viewed and understood without that contextual knowledge, but the impact from viewing the media with the knowledge is very different. Which of course the whole discussion, is exactly what it’s like to consume media with someone problematic - exactly how able, or worthwhile, is separating the art from the artist? Does their intent even matter all that much if how it is consumed is completely antithetical to their position? If someone hateful has a work that everyone consumes and the socially perpetuated message is from love and kindness, does it matter if the artist is problematic? Or does their work become a slap in the face to themselves, so long as the consumers aren’t supportive of the artist but the positive message behind the work - as mentioned this could be as simple as buying the book second hand or pirating it. I don’t remotely have definitive answers to these, but I do think that the discussions surrounding problematic works can be more important than trying to sweep them under the rug in many cases. That of course also isn’t something that’s guaranteed. I’m also not trying to say that there is a definitive answer for any of these, moreso that it almost comes to be a case-by-case basis, per person.
I think it comes down to a mix of the intent of consumption, whether it’s perpetuating or highlighting, as well as the consumers worldview affecting their perspective - like how the movie Idiocracy is received across all demographics. You’d think the conservative mindset would write this movie off, but somehow there is a narrative that fits into their worldview that affects how they perceive and interact with the media.
I’m also not condoning any problematic artists. I grew up with Harry Potter but I haven’t interacted with the IP since the final movie (not the new series), and my interactions since have been through my Plex server, so no direct support. I was interested in the game as a concept and there are people that aren’t her who worked on it, but I’m also neither invested enough in the IP nor interested in supporting her - were I ever to try to play it I would pirate it outright, and I think it would mostly be so that I was able to have a full understanding of the game, its mechanics, seeing the specific problems as they’re presented in game. But that’s me consuming the media with this knowledge in mind, almost inherently creating a dialogue between myself, the property, and society. With that in mind, is my playing that game problematic? Some might still think so, others might think not. I think the same could be said for video games that get called “woke”, such as The Last of Us 2 being poorly received upon release - from an outsiders perspective many critiques were almost entirely comprised of misogyny. Any actual shortcomings of the game were eclipsed by things that just were not an issue, but some consumers decided it was. The reality for that game seems simple; people wanted more Joel and they didn’t get that. Our cultural shortcoming of respecting women have heavily affected any media that represents them, calling them things like Mary Sues or just using woke as a blanket term.
(cont) Finally, there are so many people and examples that I also don’t explicitly fault anyone for liking a problematic artists work, within reason. Someone can love the A-Team and have no idea Crazy Murdock is certifiably insane, or Dilbert strips etc. Consumption with ignorance isn’t ideal but it’s okay within reason. I also think that people can be allowed to have an exception. I don’t support deforestation for Palm Oil but I fucking love Nutella and I’m sorry but I won’t give that up as it’s been the one thing that has kept me going at times of despair. I’m allowed to have that and I can feel okay rationalizing it because of how I carry myself for other products, even if my consumption of it isn’t inherently ethical. Whether or not purchasing Nutella negates my convictions (like boycotting Nestle and trying to avoid non-sustainable practices) becomes irrelevant because it comes down to my happiness. I feel the same way for AI art for general consumers - I personally think that it’s people like little Timmy and overworked Jane who are just using Midjourney to make fun photos to make themselves happy. These are people who likely wouldn’t be commissioning art anyway, and their happiness is allowed to exist. For production of other things someone mentioned shoes as another example, which I personally try very hard to find ethical ones but in practice I always end up with PUMA’s because they fit my feet and have lasted longer. It’s something I wish I could change, but I’m stuck between values and blistered feet and buying another pair far more quickly than usual (just for this one example I bought shoes from Thousandfell and I had to get a new pair within 6 months from basic work wear) just to have to break them in again.
I think media from the perspective of ethical consumption is only a skipping stone away from corporate consumption, with the main difference being that the former you have a little more freedom of choice to decide with a much wider range of acceptability - is the author someone you want to support or do they just have an idea worth talking about, but you need to be informed first? Compared to which handbag/pair of shoes I should by because of how other people perceive my social status.
The former may have problematic elements but they can be discussed and support isn’t as outright. It’s more likely to highlight the issue, even if you’re consuming the work of someone problematic. The latter is a byproduct of societies problematic elements, it is hard to not perpetuate the issues unless you are specifically going out of your way to correct them, if you can buy second-hand or whatever else. Anyway, I realize I scoped this out a bit wider than the original question, but only because I think they are closely related, the main difference simply being that it’s not necessarily inherently ethical to consume a problematic artists works, while general consumption is just so difficult to avoid problematic business.
Honestly, there is so much art and so many services and tools out there, that I try to avoid sending money towards ones made by shitty people.
I loved HP as a kid, but I’m not going to support JKR’s dullard takes on trans people. It’s clear she knows literally nothing beyond what her transphobic friend and their wine club “LGB Alliance” of straight white women tell her, but she still feels the need to parrot it online in front of millions of people. And guess what? There are other books about magic out there.
In terms of my judgement criteria, it’s not some fixed system, but my 2 main considerations are:
How much does a bad person benefit financially from the product?
How much are bad people responsible for the creation of the product?
Generally-speaking, if either of those can be answered with “A lot”, I avoid it.
So for instance, in the case of Hogwarts: Legacy, while JKR wasn’t responsible for making the product almost at all, she publicly indicated that she was making a lot of money from it, so I did not purchase it.
Ditto for AWS; once I was able to afford a cheap refurb server, I shut down my AWS accounts and been self-hosting everything.
The only thing that’s changed about artists and people in power is that we now know a lot more about their beliefs and personal lives than we used to. One thing that hasn’t changed is that everybody has skeletons in their closet and is the hero in their own story.
As such, and given that I don’t seek out salacious details about people I’ll never meet, so long as their irrelevant-to-the-content/product personal views don’t filter into what they produce, I tend to be unaware of anything else about them.
There are of course exceptions, with Musk being at the top of the list. But as I’m not in an income bracket that would let me avail myself of any of his products, it’s still largely irrelevant.
And the further back you go in someone’s history to find dirt, the more likely they’ve changed. I’d hate to be judged now by some of my early columns in college when I was in my edgy atheist libertarian raver phase, so I’m inclined to give others a pass on adolescent musings.
With more recent stuff, as people let more of their personality into their crafted public personas, it’s not all that difficult to deduce whether their worldview is going to be offensive. But commerce overall is not about whether I’d enjoy grabbing a beer with someone so much as whether their product fulfills a need.
I hate the history thing. People still go after Brendan Eich for donating $1000 to the Yes on Prop 8 campaign in 2008. Prop 8 passed with 52.24% of the vote, over 7-million California voters probably including many that people still like (thanks secret ballot). It was thrown out by courts, nothing to do with people being moral.
That’s not to say he’s a good guy I agree with, he’s said and done other things much more recently that I don’t agree with, like his stance on COVID, but Prop 8 is always the number one thing people mention.
Edit: even later on in this thread. People should boycott anything made in California if that one donation is such a painful thing.
First off, the kagi news is a bummer. I’ve really liked it and picked up a subscription mostly because of some buzz I saw around here, but seeing this news is a shame and setting up some red flags in my mind.
But to answer your question, I think I personally have a couple ways I approach this…
If the evidence someone is transphobic, racist, etc…is from a long time ago (eg someone is digging up ancient tweets to prove someone is some sort of “-ist” today), I tend to give them more grace because people should be allowed to change. I know I didn’t have great views on some of this stuff when I was younger and it’s easy to forget these celebrities/people in power are fallible human beings. I’ll take their response to unearthing these views as a sign of whether or not they’re worth supporting going forward. If they’re regretful and seem like they’re trying to do better, I’m good. The kagi creator seems to not pass this standard for me.
If it’s something I want to use/consume and it could impact more than just the individual. JK Rowling is a good example of this. I’d struggle to want to buy any of her books again because I see a clearer line of sight from my purchase to her pocket. But something like Hogwarts Legacy, which I knew I would enjoy and my wife would love, and is made by many people with a passion for her world, I’m OK with it. The line to Rowling is a lot blurrier and impacts people who don’t have a say in what project(s) they work on.
It’s also easier to ignore or skip smaller scale things like an indie game from a deplorable developer vs. the next Marvel/HP/insert your beloved franchise game from someone equally deplorable. None of this is ever perfect and time and attention are finite resources for all of us. If Harry Potter is how you need to unwind because it’s your favorite thing, more power to you. It’s not my job nor anyone else’s to police the things you like or make you feel bad for liking them.
We should all do our best to try and support good people in a system that incentivizes bad people and give ourselves some grace when we (seemingly inevitably these days) find out those people were actually scum.
I think there’s something to be said about timeframe even for individuals who held deplorable views. Purchasing art from a dead artist doesn’t go to supporting their life or spreading their shitty viewpoint - instead it will go to a company which holds the rights or an estate which benefits the family. Unless we happen to know the company/estate is deplorable in some way or another, we shouldn’t judge them based on the connection with the original artist - after all we don’t get to choose our parents and may not hold the same views they do.
100%. And going down that path you can start to enter into the whole “OK, so all companies are bad or do bad things, but I also need to be a functioning member of society.”
I can hate what Shell/Marathon/BP are doing to the environment but I also need to make sure my car gets me to work. Google or Apple can enact terrible policies I disagree with but generally speaking I have to deal with them to have a cell phone. Easier when we’re discussing a piece of artwork (not a core need in life) but it’s where my comment about a system that incentivizes “bad people” really came from.
So I think my moral philosophy is actually closest to show The Good Place now that I see it written out!
I’m revisiting old favourites of mine - the first two books of the “achtsam morden” (mindful murder) series by Karsten Dusse. Unfortunately they’re German so probably not of much interest to you, but if you happen to speak it or come across a translation that I’m not aware of, do give the first book a try.
The protagonist is a lawyer mainly working for a mobster he doesn’t like. He’s increasingly unhappy with his work and life, and his marriage and the relationship with his little daughter are falling apart… until his wife forces him to go to a mindfulness seminar. When he starts applying the things he learns there, his life takes a dramatic turn as the results of his mindfulness are the death of his boss, him taking his place as the leader of a criminal enterprise and eventually using the enterprise’s resources to kill his opponents one by one and secure his daughter a place in kindergarten.
Especially the first book is a pleasant read both for the protagonist’s stoically mindful handling of increasingly violent and unlikely situations and for the actual exercises in mindfulness explained and demonstrated to the reader. You learn both why you should still love your parents-in-law even if you hate their guts (and how to do that) as well as how to correctly detonate a couple of hand grenades taped to a mobster’s nuts, all from the point of view of a very smart lawyer (which the author actually is in real life). In that the book is both educational and entertaining at the same time.
i wanted something light and short, so i listened to mindy kaling’s second book, “why not me?” plenty of laughs, and it made my five hour car trip feel a lot less awful.
Alyaza what have been your favorite/most interesting book among the four?
the majority of my reading list would not make for particularly comfortable reading so i’ll just point you to the fairly normal pick from last year, which is I’m Glad My Mom Died
now that i’ve read a bit more this week: The Great Transition by Nick Fuller Googins is an early contender for my book of the year and the first to get 5 stars this year from me (although i’m a generous reviewer)
I was wondering why I had mounting anxiety and some shakes, only to realize that I had not eaten for several hours. Roast beef sandwich and some chamomile tea fixed that right up.
A little bit of hard salami, roast beef, two slices of extra sharp cheddar, a squirt of the whataburger creamy pepper sauce and hamburger dill pickles on slices of nature’s own thick sliced brioche.
I moved to Chicago at the end of October from the deep south. The past few days the weather has been hovering around 0⁰F and that has been an adjustment. I’ve figured out the clothing I can wear to bear it. Sunday my feet felt like they were going to fall off after only a few minutes walking around. Last night I had to wait for a bus for like 20 minutes and I was totally fine. I switched boots and it fixed my whole issue with comfort.
Getting ready for more snow after spending a few days bucking and splitting some of next year’s wood from a tree that fell in the yard. Kinda hoping we get some decent coverage and that it sticks around for longer than a day, but that it doesn’t cause too much disruption for @Chris Remington and other folks in New England. My father found some back country skis as a christmas gift that should be better for getting around some of the hill on our property and I’m dying to try them.
Well, 2 weeks into having a laptop running linux, I accidentally deleted the etc file and can’t get back the few files on it that I created. Luckily, none of it is really all that important and the rest was already backed up onto a thumb drive.
Now I have the task of reinstalling and setting things back up and getting a quick assignment done for one of my classes. Thankfully I’ve got plenty of time to do both.
picked up the new foster dog, coco on saturday. she’s acclimating pretty well, considering she went from a free roaming outdoor only dog on 17 acres to a downtown indoor dog on 1/3 of an acre. my old man australian shepherd is having a harder time accepting her, but we’re getting there with short 5-10 minute intros where he’s on leash so i can redirect when he gets too in her face. the little chihuahua mix has always been good with other dogs, so no surprise that they’re interacting really well.
coco goes to the vet later today, and fingers crossed there’s no major issues.
update: she’s in perfect health! no parasites, healthy weight, good teeth and eyes.
As much as that writing style is rather unique and interesting, it is dreadfully difficult to follow. There’s a verbosity to it that would make me think the person who wrote it sat in front of a thesaurus looking for the exact word to replace what they originally wrote about fifteen times per sentence if I didn’t already know eccentric people like this who exist in real life and pride themselves in their ability to use the absolute ‘best’ word to represent their thoughts at any one moment, ignoring the fact that many people will not be able to follow for lack of ever hearing, let alone understanding what the word means. With that being said, I did very much enjoy the imagery the writer was able to conjure on the subject of enshittification and the general state of affairs of the average tech bro.
Looking at the replies on that open ai thread, and how many of people are just going on rooting for ai companies just taking other people’s work without their consent, is alarming, also probably signals that this community might not be for me.
Thank you for everything, and sadly I think I might leave beehaw altogether.
Going to have a look. Not because I don’t believe you, but because it seems so at odds with the usual vibe here that am wondering whether someone unleashed some bot accounts to push this stuff.
If it is regular Beehaw members, that is for sure unnerving!
EDIT: am too dumb at internet to find it. Tried a search (for “ai” to keep it broad), browsing local and looking at subscriptions which aren’t totally incompatible places for such a topic, but coming up blank. Feel free to fling a link my way.
I understand your sentiment, threads on generative AI get me all worked up as well. I couldn’t resist jumping into the fray and I did have the distinct impression that most users supporting OpenAI’s stance were originating from other Lemmy instances and that many Beehaw based users were against it. My humble opinion is that this specific thread is more representative of the Fediverse’s vibe than of Beehaw’s.
I very much doubt you’ll get snark for your comment. That’s just not what Beehaw stands for. If you decide to hang in there some more, I suggest you pay attention to the commenters’ Lemmy instance. Beehaw embodies the hope for a caring web community, but the rest of the Fediverse doesn’t necessarily share the same ideals.
Technology is fun and interesting. AI is interesting and there’s a lot of research going on right now.
But I noticed the same things you do. Many people seem to be “anti-humanity”. We as people need workers protections, better social programs, and more so terrible consequences of these technologies don’t harm us. Technology should be used to help people and societies thrive not for the elite to keep even more power.
Beehaw may not be perfect. And you have a great example of why beehaw should leave the fediverse. But beehaw is the only place I’ve found where we can have civil discussion on topics. Much of the toxicity introduced in beehaw come from non beehaw users. I enjoy my time here, but it’s not for everyone. If you leave, I hope you find a space that’s best for you.
pretty great! had my first agility lesson of the new year with the pups, and they rocked it. got a crate for the incoming foster dog (her name is coco, pics next week). got together with some bike/camp folks and planned our next campout and longer day ride. got to see the fellowship of the ring (extended edition) at the theater. played a first session of a tabletop game called wickedness.
i need to stop being so busy, but at least it’s good busy. 😮💨
i always pick dogs i think will enjoy it, since it’s my main reason for having dogs, hehe. my last dog (passed away last year) was the only one i’ve owned who didn’t really enjoy agility on any level. she was my professional couch potato. she was also much more chill than my other two agility nerds.
Couch potatoes are important too! And from the looks of it she was a pro.
Mine should enjoy agility in theory - she’s super smart, easily bored, very nimble and needs a lot of exercise. I don’t know if she’s being considerate by trying not to expose her clumsy human to such situations or if she just thinks such simple challenges would be degrading to such a majestic animal as herself.
At least our slightly overweight french bulldog (of all things) is ultra-motivated as long as there’s a treat waiting behind every other obstacle.
chat
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.