4 ms·

> If anyone is free to copy and fully use my work I will not do some of the work. Why? Please read me carefully: I am not accusing you of resentment. But I

> If anyone is free to copy and fully use my work I will not do some of the work. Why? Please read me carefully: I am not accusing you of resentment. But I already excluded issues of finance and recognition in my conditions above. So, other than spitefulness and resentment, what else might possess us to declare that if "anyone is free to copy and fully use" some work, then it's not worth doing? Do you not feel the incredible plenitude and abundance of creativity that urges you toward generosity? Is capitalism responsible for somehow poisoning us with the idea that scarcity is necessary for valuable endeavour?

lotsofpulp 4y ago
> But I already excluded issues of finance and recognition in my conditions above. Finance is pretty important though, if you want to feed and shelter yourself and your family. Most other types of work cannot be made worthless by others seeing it and copying it. But the work of researching and thinking and producing a solution can, so the government figured there should be a way to recoup costs and provide incentive.
bluecalm 4y ago
It's not about resentment. It's about reward. Unless you're in a very privileged position you need to make money from your work or you won't be about to continue doing it. If you have done great work you hope to be rewarded for it and that includes financials. I want to live in a world where people who do awesome work are awesomely rewarded for it. I don't get what you're about with the scarcity argument. Everyone is free to write a novel or create software or whatever. I just want people who do the work to be in position to profit from it not someone who didn't do the work
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  But I'm telling you, for the third time now, that money is excluded from the argument I am making. Yet you keep dragging it back to the same spot again. Are you entrenched in that you are not able to see the world in any other way than through money? Yes, money is important. Now, can you forget that? Put it aside and try to move on to a higher level of thought? ("No" is a perfectly acceptable answer that would satisfy my genuine curiosity)
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    The point he's making is that you can't just say "money is excluded from the argument I'm making" and still be anywhere relevant to reality. People dislike copying because for most people it's an attack on their income, either by taking their recognition (eg copying "free" images from a photographer) or by actually taking their income (eg copying paid art). If you exclude financial arguments you exclude the vast majority of people who share their work. To bring this around to code, most popular licenses allow copying someone's code with proper attribution, so clearly copying is okay as long as you don't take recognition from a work that isn't profit motivated.
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      I think "No" would have saved you many words. Nonetheless I am disappointed that there appears not a single voice amongst you who can conceive matters of creation outside a framework of money, income, profit, reward, theft, entitlement, licenses, capitalism, communism.... they really have you where they want you.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        This website used to be called Startup News. It probably still should be.
        nonrandomstring 4y ago
        Or did the idea of what a "start-up" is mature to incorporate bigger ideas about value?
      - stale2002 4y ago
        Can't you just engage with their argument? It seems pretty obvious to most people, that some artists would be unable to produce certain works of art, if they did not have the funding to pay their bills. Why are you unable to understand this? Just engage with the argument.
- johtso 4y ago
  This is why we need some form of universal basic income..
  - bluecalm 4y ago
    I would like to make money out of my work if we have UBI as well, you know?

lotsofpulp 4y ago

> But I already excluded issues of finance and recognition in my conditions above. Finance is pretty important though, if you want to feed and shelter yourself and your family. Most other types of work cannot be made worthless by others seeing it and copying it. But the work of researching and thinking and producing a solution can, so the government figured there should be a way to recoup costs and provide incentive.

bluecalm 4y ago

It's not about resentment. It's about reward. Unless you're in a very privileged position you need to make money from your work or you won't be about to continue doing it. If you have done great work you hope to be rewarded for it and that includes financials. I want to live in a world where people who do awesome work are awesomely rewarded for it. I don't get what you're about with the scarcity argument. Everyone is free to write a novel or create software or whatever. I just want people who do the work to be in position to profit from it not someone who didn't do the work

nonrandomstring 4y ago
But I'm telling you, for the third time now, that money is excluded from the argument I am making. Yet you keep dragging it back to the same spot again. Are you entrenched in that you are not able to see the world in any other way than through money? Yes, money is important. Now, can you forget that? Put it aside and try to move on to a higher level of thought? ("No" is a perfectly acceptable answer that would satisfy my genuine curiosity)
- dotnet00 4y ago
  The point he's making is that you can't just say "money is excluded from the argument I'm making" and still be anywhere relevant to reality. People dislike copying because for most people it's an attack on their income, either by taking their recognition (eg copying "free" images from a photographer) or by actually taking their income (eg copying paid art). If you exclude financial arguments you exclude the vast majority of people who share their work. To bring this around to code, most popular licenses allow copying someone's code with proper attribution, so clearly copying is okay as long as you don't take recognition from a work that isn't profit motivated.
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    I think "No" would have saved you many words. Nonetheless I am disappointed that there appears not a single voice amongst you who can conceive matters of creation outside a framework of money, income, profit, reward, theft, entitlement, licenses, capitalism, communism.... they really have you where they want you.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      This website used to be called Startup News. It probably still should be.
      - nonrandomstring 4y ago
        Or did the idea of what a "start-up" is mature to incorporate bigger ideas about value?
    - stale2002 4y ago
      Can't you just engage with their argument? It seems pretty obvious to most people, that some artists would be unable to produce certain works of art, if they did not have the funding to pay their bills. Why are you unable to understand this? Just engage with the argument.
johtso 4y ago
This is why we need some form of universal basic income..
- bluecalm 4y ago
  I would like to make money out of my work if we have UBI as well, you know?