• 15 Posts
  • 852 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: December 18th, 2023

help-circle



  • YSK that scientists, engineers, and mathematicians are not paid for the knowledge they create. The knowledge is public domain.

    When they publish articles, they typically transfer the copyright to the publisher, which is why they will happily assist you in pirating articles.

    Patents are public with the express purpose that others may learn from them. Only the actual use of an invention requires permission. Even that lasts only 20 years rather than 100+ years as is the case with copyrights.

    So, this quote is not an explanation of any problems. It is (probably deliberately) misleading. Researchers will not receive any license fees. Rather, these fees will subtract from research budgets.



  • By “society”? That’s what NSFW labels are all about. Even the expression is a nonsense euphemism. (You’d think that any not work related websites would be “nsfw”.) Anything to do with the mechanics of human reproduction is taboo. In practice, that’s 90% depictions of feminine bodies.

    Of course, there is more to it than that. For example, in Germany, until last year, it was illegal to “advertise” abortions. In practice, that meant that doctors were prosecuted for providing information on the web.





  • Can’t read the whole article, but it sounds like copyright violations. Exchanging the face is really not enough

    As to depicting people with Down-Syndrome: Nothing illegal about that. We can only hope that Trump outlaws forced diversity soon. Seriously, someone who’s outraged that marginalized groups are depicted in the same way as other groups, probably isn’t particularly supportive of that group.

    For what it’s worth, while most people with Down-Syndrome can’t function in society without assistance, some have even graduated from college. There’d probably be more college graduates if it wasn’t for the stereotypes.





  • Sort of. A camera with internet connectivity could automatically “notarize” photos. The signing authority would vouch that the photo (or other file) hasn’t been altered since the moment of signing. It wouldn’t be evidence that the photo was not manipulated before that moment.

    That could make, EG, photos of a traffic accident good evidence in court. If there wasn’t time to for manipulation, then the photos must be real. It wouldn’t work for photos that could have been taken at any time.

    You could upload a hash to the blockchain of a cryptocurrency for the same purpose. The integrity of the cryptocurrency would then vouch that the photo was unaltered since the upload. But that’s not cost-effective. You could even upload the hash to Reddit, since it’s not believable that they would manipulate timestamps to help some random guy somewhere in the world commit fraud.