6 ms·
The problem as I see it, when you get that famous, you look like a piggy bank to some people. Say you were walking down the street and tripped over someones foo
by _fat_santa 5y ago
The problem as I see it, when you get that famous, you look like a piggy bank to some people. Say you were walking down the street and tripped over someones foot, most likely you apologize and move on. But if Ed was walking down the street and tripped over the wrong persons foot, that person would quickly turn it into "I'm suing", "you hurt my foot", "I will need therapy", "I think I need to go the hospital". Now none of those things may be true but they are all in service of one goal: "I just had an interaction with someone super famous and super rich, let me see how much I can extract from them for my own gain".
- alan-hn 5y agoThat's because the US (and many other 'westernized' locales) have this shitty ideology where the individual matters more than other individuals or the collective. It's why the US has so many scammers and fraudsters. Edit: this is from my perspective living in the US. I'm not saying that the US has more scammers than other places, just a ton due to this western ideology. My comment about the ideology includes places such as Europe and possibly even China now
- smitty1e 5y agoOnce one asserts that the plural precedes the singluar, fresh vistas of tyranny open to whoever is in control.
- alan-hn 5y agoAnd we experience tyranny of the individual at the expense of everyone else currently. This is why businesses destroy the environment, to save individuals money (corporations are individuals as well in this context). This is just one example and not all-inclusive Balance is what's needed, not extremism
- smitty1e 5y agoStrong concur. Questions: 1) Which is the greater danger: the group, or the individual? (In the long run, clearly the former.) 2) What is the difference between a public sector group and a private sector group? 3) How is the balance maintained?
- alan-hn 5y ago1: I don't know if either are a greater danger necessarily. Numerous laws or regulations that are overall harmful could be enacted on the behalf if individuals the same as the group although one could assume that the group has greater power in their numbers. But on the same hand, there are a same number if individuals so that seems difficult to judge to me 2: the more I think about this, the less I know how to answer 3: Currently in the US, the balance seems to be derived through voting and lobbying but large groups seem to have more power in that case, although it could be said that many of these groups aren't working for the greater good (what I refer to as the society or collective) but instead serve individual or private interests of a few It seems that we need more robust mechanisms to ensure balance in society from my perspective
- dntrkv 5y agoBoth ideologies have their pros and cons. Take a look at Shanghai right now to see the downsides of when the collective matters more than the individual.
- alan-hn 5y agoThe ideology in China has become arguably 'westernized'
- gloryjulio 5y agoI agree with US has so many scammers and fraudsters part. But don't agree with the reason. There are tons of scammers and fraudsters in Japan too. Look at those new religions, elderly scammers, the copyright situation in Japan is not any better. It doesn't matter whether the society is collective or individualistic.
- mrjangles 5y ago>have this shitty ideology where the individual matters more than ... the collective You do realize that the 20th century gave us very good reason to feel this way right?
- lupire 5y agoThe collective is not the same thing as an all-powerful state.
- mrjangles 5y agoTwo things: 1) An all powerful state is the logical conclusion of anyone who believes the collective is more important than the individual. 2) There were many benevolent all powerful states during the 20th century, but every single powerful state that believed in collectivism turned into a murdering hell hole filled with poverty and suffering where the poorest people risked their lives to flee to countries that believed the individual is more important than the collective.
- alan-hn 5y ago>1) An all powerful state is the logical conclusion of anyone who believes the collective is more important than the individual. That is an absolutely massive assumption not based in reality. Its possible to care about the system as a whole without thinking that there needs to be a centralized authority.
- strogonoff 5y agoIndeed, caring for the society more than the individual and all-powerful governments are at best orthogonal, at worst inversely correlated. Take Hong Kong for example. Citizens are mindful and care about the collective a lot, while having individual business to take care of. In daily life they are conscious about following the rules not because they are forced to but because if they didn’t the dense city would come to standstill within minutes. HK was never under a communist dictatorship. Similar with Japan and Korea, which are not dictatorships and thus the case for an all-powerful government is very tough to make (a government that is democratically elected to enforce the will of the people is hardly an all-powerful government—it’s the people who are all-powerful in that scenario). Meanwhile, over in the mainland China you get selfish drivers speeding through red lights, giant interchanges full of cars at standstill (presumably, due to such behavior), organized scam mafia employing trafficked children to “sell flowers” on subway stations, etc. I’d argue that all-powerful government is in fact the supreme (but hidden) example of individualism where power-hungry individuals on top do everything to ensure they reign forever and cannot be replaced, everybody else be damned; and the rest of the country (whether consciously realizing it or not) follows the example set by their leaders. A factor that might correlate with societies being less individualistic is ethnical homogeneity. I hope there are examples to the contrary, though.
- educaysean 5y agoYou really think US has so many scammers and fraudsters? You obviously have no idea how rotten outwardly-civilized societies such as South Korea are. The scale of investment frauds and various other scamming operations taking place there are a constant plague, and the regulators are comically unprepared to deal with it time after time. South Korea is also a notoriously group minded society built on Confucius ideals and a strong sense of nationalism / ethnocentrism. I've no idea how you arrived at your theory, but it just sounds incredibly adsurd to me.
- alan-hn 5y agoWhataboutism is poor form How has South Korea changed in terms of culture and ideology over the last 100-200 years? Most places are adapting 'westernized' ideas because they appear profitable economically
- educaysean 5y agoMy post is not whataboutism. It's pointing out the absolute dearth of evidence linking higher scamming rates to societies that value individualism. A more proper name for this would be a "counter example", and it's something you should absolutely expect as a response when you put forth statements online.
- alan-hn 5y agoYour "counter example" does nothing to address the westernization of business and corporate operations in SK
- educaysean 5y agoI see where the disconnect is. I have a hard time placing your bar for being considered "westernized". Can you cite me the names of some nations that you regard as falling below the threshold?
- 5y ago
- azinman2 5y agoYou’re acting like the equivalent of patent trolls were trying to shake him down. But that’s not the case: it was other singer-songwriters. And if it really is a coincidence it’s quite the coincidence: https://youtu.be/8OrT52ZToUk https://youtu.be/8OrT52ZToUk (Ignore the title of that video and just listen/watch the content). Now there are obviously many common chord progressions in pop music, but that is a bit different than a much longer melody. Enough so that the courts agreed. You also have to wonder if the success of that melody was already imprinted on his subconscious. What I don’t know is if him having original thought versus attempting to copy matters. If I publish a poem, and then you try to publish the same words even if you didn’t intend it to be a copy, then you’re still committing a copyright violation regardless of intent.
- hansvm 5y ago> What I don’t know is if him having original thought versus attempting to copy matters. If I publish a poem, and then you try to publish the same words even if you didn’t intend it to be a copy, then you’re still committing a copyright violation regardless of intent. That's the case for, e.g., patents, but it is explicitly not how copyright works. Clean-room reproductions are valid defenses.
- after_care 5y agoI'm unsure "clean-room defense" can apply to a melody from a top 10 song.
- hansvm 5y agoThe court just has to weigh all the evidence. A lot of people have heard top-10 songs, so it would be hard to prove true independence. At an extreme though, if you could prove that somebody was perfectly isolated (e.g., if they had video evidence of not being exposed since that top-10 song was produced), a clean-room implementation from that individual would satisfy copyright law (mostly, give or take the as-of-yet mostly legally untouched minefield of deep-fakes). The only real question is where courts would draw a line between that kind of conclusive evidence and some random Joe pinky-swearing they produced the latest Taylor Swift hit in their garage and that it's accidentally kind of similar.