I’m not sure I understand how deepfake porn is supposed to be ruining lives here. From the article it seems like the issue is not any concern that it would be mistaken for real, but instead just people having a very horrified reaction to seeing that sort of depiction of themselves? Mostly it seems like the deepfake aspect is sort of a trivial distraction to the real issue on display there of gangs of men targeting random women for online harassment. If there was no such thing as deepfakes other sexually explicit or disturbing images could sub in easily enough.

Maybe the new deepfake ban will be useful as a way of going after these harassment gangs that previously didn’t face legal consequences? But it’s sort of an inexact tool for that job, given that there are presumably lots of deepfake images out there not used for harassment, and that’s it’s easy enough for harassers to switch away from deepfakes if using them becomes a major legal vulnerability.

If someone is using it as a platform to get their message out to people obviously they’ll care if they’re banned from it. Can’t just say that someone bad having the power to issue those bans means they don’t matter.

I think you got it and effectively answered it, thanks.

How do you work the office only having space for 20% of employees? Makes a lot of sense but would be annoying to hot desk. My office only has us in two days a week but has not cut down on the number of desks at all, giving up the potential savings.

Yeah I’d say it’s equivalent to any other inappropriate joke a kid might tell - a moment for a conversation but not anything too serious.

This was impersonation on the level of “hey look at me, I’m funkless_eck, I’m a pedophile! dur dur dur” not some attempt to make it seem like those teachers were actually pedophiles.

I mean everyone gets that it was in fact a joke right? What are we talking about here? People are trying to make it sound like the kids were harassing these teachers or trying to trick people into thinking they were pedophiles as opposed to passing around dumb memes about them between each other.

I’d say it’s a lot more like the lunch table, or even like a table at a restaurant off-campus. These kids were not directing these jokes at anyone but each other, but were in a semi-public place where they could be overheard. It’s basically equivalent to a teacher walking by a table full of students making jokes about their teachers by pedophiles and getting them in trouble after overhearing.

Again, how is it harassment if it’s just jokes these kids are passing around between each other that are only discoverable by snooping in them?

Yeah I’m not really seeing the harassment angle when you have to track these kids down on TikTok to see the videos.

So kids are joking around with each other online and the school is monitoring their accounts and punishing them for mean jokes about teachers? Leave these kids alone

It’s just sort of a non sequitur if it’s about Trump - this is an article about picking a candidate to maximize Dem chances of beating Trump, neither side of the argument on who that should be wants Trump.

That sounds more like Trump than Biden. The trouble is Trump is probably what we’ll get if Biden doesn’t suck it up and drop out of the race.

No copyright is about the “right” to “copy” the work in question, not the attribution. Works that are in the public domain still list the author.

Shortening the time is good, and adjusting it while it still does apply to allow for more legal free sharing of the work.

Eliminating copyright doesn’t mean they’d be allowed to lie about who wrote what they were publishing. Anything an artist creates blowing up and gaining wide appreciation is very good for that artist’s future prospects. An artist who is spreading their work for free anyway is much better off in the scenario where there’s no copyright and everyone understands the need to tip / patronize their favorite artists.

If you are already sharing something for free in order to gain publicity, what is the downside of others repackaging them and spreading them further? That is exactly the kind of publicity you’re trying to gain.

“your proposal would harm young artists who need to share their works in order to gain publicity for something they intend to sell and sustain themselves on.”

The default is already for young artists to share a lot of their work hoping to get noticed. Getting rid of copyright would be reorienting the whole system to center that experience more rather than the established artists and art producing corporations who now are in a strong enough position to charge. “Making it” would just mean that your patreon was doing gangbusters rather than selling a lot of copies of whatever your art is.

Yeah Project Gutenberg really demonstrates how this is all pretty much already built, just illegal to include recent works in. Though of course that’s just books where the post copyright free library could also include all other art and culture such as tv, radio, movies, images, games, etc

Yeah even if you are pro-copyright as a way to encourage artistic creation there is no justification for how insanely long works stay under copyright. Or for banning free filesharing of copyrighted works.