5 ms·

Maybe the fundamental disagreement is what constitutes the epsilon and whether a straight "copy" is actually dishonest/bad/immoral? In your example, say the co

Maybe the fundamental disagreement is what constitutes the epsilon and whether a straight "copy" is actually dishonest/bad/immoral? In your example, say the comedian is testing the joke on a new demographic (christian vs. jewish, say), so the epsilon in this case is not just the substitution of a word in the joke but also testing the joke on a new "market". On the one hand, I think there's a place for giving credit to the original source and even having things fall under (some limited form of) copyright. On the other hand, I also see the need for experimentation and freedom to use ideas, which aren't and shouldn't be copyrighted. Wikipedia wasn't the only internet encyclopedia, it just happened to be the one that "won". Maybe there was a reason why Wikipedia won on merit but random chance was, no doubt, a big part in it. Relying too heavily on the novelty of ideas prevents experimentation.

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
If a new comedian changed the existing 'why did the chicken cross the road?' joke to 'why did the duck cross the road?' and claimed it as a new joke they invented, then that would not be ok, in my opinion. However, that's not really my primary issue with this article, as I've said in a couple other comments here, my issue is that 'the epsilon method' itself is not a new idea or concept. Both 'copying' and 'copying with slight differences' are already well known by everyone everywhere. So much so that there are whole bodies of law that attempt to define when its ok and when it isn't. The article is presenting this as a novel and insightful idea when it is not.
- abetusk 4y ago
  I mean, I agree somewhat but I found it interesting enough. Note that this is also in the context of startup culture and a pushback to the 'zero-to-one' idea, so in that sense it's novelty is highly context dependent.

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago

If a new comedian changed the existing 'why did the chicken cross the road?' joke to 'why did the duck cross the road?' and claimed it as a new joke they invented, then that would not be ok, in my opinion. However, that's not really my primary issue with this article, as I've said in a couple other comments here, my issue is that 'the epsilon method' itself is not a new idea or concept. Both 'copying' and 'copying with slight differences' are already well known by everyone everywhere. So much so that there are whole bodies of law that attempt to define when its ok and when it isn't. The article is presenting this as a novel and insightful idea when it is not.

abetusk 4y ago
I mean, I agree somewhat but I found it interesting enough. Note that this is also in the context of startup culture and a pushback to the 'zero-to-one' idea, so in that sense it's novelty is highly context dependent.