tb_

The way Mozilla can advocate for web standards will be sorely missed.

Big names attract followers, whether you like it or not. A certain name being on a certain platform may be the deciding factor for a hundred others. So it becoming easier to post everywhere, giving others more choice, is a good thing.

There’s also one in the UK Tom Scott did a video on.

Vivaldi is my backup browser, but I don’t want to contribute to Chromium’s market share so Firefox it is 99% of the time.

Yes but actually no because the massive IP holders will still sue the everliving shit out of you.

They’ll happily take your art though.

Better yet: you don’t have to pay Microsoft at all to make the switch!

Of course it’s a whimper, Timmy wants you to buy your mom an iPhone to chat.

Perhaps not exclusively so, but it could’ve convinced some to choose a Tesla over other EV’s.

I guess Musk hadn’t yet fired enough people after closing their entire charging station division.

Better than leaving the barn wide open

All of Microsoft’s apps feel increasingly unwieldy and sluggish. Remember when they put an entire webbrowser in their “Math”/calculator app?

it’s always been upfront

The language it uses/used to use was rather ambiguous, especially for less tech savvy people.

Perhaps it wasn’t false, but it definitely wasn’t upfront.

On a glance it seemed to work well enough.

There’s also Matrix chat, which is federated.

Oh, I seem to have misinterpreted your message then. That’s pretty neat

Firefox has plug-ins available out of the box on Android, including uBlock Origin.

Recently I stumbled on Relay, still going strong with a subscription model (because API fees).

That said, I refuse to return to that platform.

*Cough* Warframe *cough*

Capitalism bukake

Thank you for reading my post, only responding to a single point, and making a strawman of the rest of my argument.

Why do I even bother.

Enjoy replacing yourself.

Now riddle me this: Who pays subscriptions for Photoshop?

Ah, my favourite argument.

“Clothing brands are using slavery to produce clothes.”

- “They ought to be produced sustainably!”

“Who’s going to pay for that?”

Perhaps generative AI models, as they currently exist, are too good to be true.

If they can only afford to pay individual artists pennies, perhaps it is something that shouldn’t be taken. If those artists are happy for their work to contribute to someone else’s MRR scheme then they should be free to submit their work wherever, or tag it with something.

I don’t care what Getty Images gets paid. I don’t know how the licensing works for that platform, but Getty doesn’t make all of its own images and those photographers and artists who contribute ought to be compensated in turn.
If that makes the work infeasible, so be it.

But if that’s a system that gets implemented now then the existing companies would have an insurmountable headstart. Should they be forced to completely wipe their work?

And Getty shouldn’t be making money off pictures from the 1800s. I agree with that too.

And I understand no “value is generated” by paying property owners. I guess you should give your books away to people on the street since the value has already been created by writing them and there’s no more point in selling them.
Not literally, of course. But if individual artists don’t make any money and/or reputation off their already made work they won’t be able to continue “generating new value”, I guess they’ll have to find some office job, or head out to the not-yet-automated mines.

It’s a shit situation which is profiting off a free and open internet. An internet which is slowly closing itself off further and further.

And I think, with all due respect, you’re misguided for being happy to contribute to your own replacement. If you sell your books on Amazon; Amazon is getting flooded with AI generated books, making it even more difficult for yours to stand out in the sea of regurgitated garbage. Maybe you personally have a system for getting around that, not everybody does. Alternatively you don’t rely on the income of your books, but at that point why bother publishing at all? Might as well send them directly to OpenAI or whomever.

Edit: Oh, better yet, because I just ran into it: Getty/Adobe Stock licensing you generated images! I’d laugh if it didn’t make me want to cry.

Small artists would get shafted one way or the other.

And ideally they wouldn’t. Letting AI companies take as they please is one part of that, therefore it should be stopped.

Injustice is such a frustrating thing. But when the opposing party has trillions of dollars and you draw in your free time there’s literally nothing you can do. So much for equality.