Banning the burning or “desecration” of a specific genre of books because it rallies the feelings of highly religious people is pandering to the views of the religious extremists. That is my point.
People who are level headed about their religion won’t demand that a state forbids to burn a book. And they won’t get worked up by it to the point they think this is something that should be handled on a state level.
Level headed people shouldn’t be out of their mind because some nutjob burns a book. Pretty sure people who are like you write aren’t keen on getting blasphemy laws back.
But that doesn’t make a lot of sense since it doesn’t matter on what instance a community is hosted or a user first registered. That’s the whole point of the Fediverse…
If you use that approach there is no way left to claim that current AI models aren’t a huge copyright infringement on the data they were trained on. Because the biggest argument for why AI is supposedly not copyright infringing it’s training data, is because it’s generated images aren’t direct copies of the works if was trained upon.
But if you start arguing the idea behind a image or the vision is somehow copyrightable than all AI models are illegal. Since they definitely work by using the ideas and visions of artists.
It is not the exact same.thing though. Unless you want to claim that you have figured out how human creativity works?
As an artist you do not look at how 300 other artists have drawn a banana, you look at a banana and try to understand how you can use different techniques to capture the form, texture, etc. of a banana.
An AI calculates from hundreds of images the probability of lines and colours being arranged in a certain way and still being interpreted as a banana. It never sees a banana or understands what it is.
Tell me, where do you see a similarity in these two processes.
I don’t see why it is complicated. It should not be copyrightable because ideas aren’t copyrightable.
Otherwise you definitely have to start fresh with AI and build new ones which somehow aren’t trained on the pictures produced by artists.
Because if you copyright the idea behind an image, than definitely all AI produced images are infringing on the copyright of the art they used for training.
Stuck in concrete wall / window T_T
What makes it “false” is that it deliberately leaves out multiple other factors that do not fit your narrative of “Israel = evil Jewish colonizers from Europe” and “Palestinians = poor victims being oppressed”.
Directly neighbouring Arab and Muslim countries and areas exiled, killed and drove out Jews amounting to more than 850 thousand who went to Israel.
That the people who we call Palestinians today in the area denied the two-state solution at that time because they did not want Israel to exist. They wanted to rather have war instead of getting their own state and share the land.
The animosity and multiple wars that were started against Israel for purely religious and ideologic reasons from the other side as well. The religious zealots aren’t only on Israel’s side.
There are numerous countries that came into existence by wars and in a similar way as Israel. It’s even less of an issue here because it’s not even a part of a country which declared independence, there wasn’t even a country in the first place!
Israel did not come into existence just because of Zionism. About half of the Jews in Israel are Mizrahim who are native to the area. They had an inferior status in the Islamic society. By your own logic it is understandable that they ultimately pushed back and declared independence after being treated as second class people for generations.
I am not sure if this was supposed to be a response to my comment or got their accidentally ?
I asked if you have a source for this claim, because I couldn’t find any:
a hard life makes people like my mother, a coddled person tends to be very emotional.
I think some people are just not compatible with each other. To try and claim one way is right or better or more rational is surprisingly unrational and not aligned with finding a solution.
When you are unable to offer emotional support or empathy to your partner, communicate early that you won’t be willing or able to listen to their problems on their terms. Then they can decide if that’s okay with them. Problem solved.
No, I don’t mean those in the past. But those happening right now.
That’s such an incredibly reduced “summary” that you can as well call it false. But in your eyes good and evil are strictly defined. Must be nice (for you). Sadly, that’s neither helpful, nor good, nor a solution.
Since you are a rational person and not just emotionally reacting, I bet you have a credible source for these blanket statements. Can you name one, please? Because I can’t find even one.
You don’t seem to know a lot about the area.
What about the approximately 20 % Palestinian Israelis? And do all of the Israelis have to disappear somehow and look for a place to live in other countries? Or only those who are first generation immigrants? What aboutAre you against immigration in general, btw?
“Kick people our of their homes”, so are you talking about the illegal settlements in the Westbank now?
You could start reading about in on Wikipedia.
You are talking about how every group can be discriminated against and how you aren’t even sure if it really is antisemitism and how anti-semitism is often just misunderstood totally valid Israeli criticism.
Hmmm… Sounds to me like you don’t want to see the issue here.
Who is supposed to pay those reparations if Israel doesn’t exist anymore and there are no Israelis?
How are the Jews supposed to protect themselves from the people who want them out of the country or dead (which is the reason why Israel came into existence in the first place)?
What kind of state do you think Palestine would be? Or is it okay to have a Muslim ethnostate but not a Jewish one?
Than if Palestinians now want to exile Israelis that also gives them the right to fight back.
Build two cases, calculate for both, drag both case through the entirety of both problems, get two answers, make a case for both answers, end up with two hypothesis. Easy!