There’s been some great ideas here, but I like yours the best.

Bill Burr complaining about being forced to be the pope would be amazing.

“I’m not going to lead mass. Leading mass is Charlie Work!”

Huh. Pope Joan?

I don’t know enough about it to confidently say they’re going to lose all their money

It happened to my relative. They didn’t lose everything, but they lost enough that they’re shopping for a mobile home for retirement, when they previously could have bought a small house.

Plausible explanation.

I used to always use Minecraft for this. Sure, they can’t do everything immediately, but I put the game on peaceful and let them explore at their own pace.

I say “used to” because Luanti (formerly MineTest, an open source Minecraft Clone*) is finished and free.

(Okay, Luanti is a lot more than a Minecraft clone. But for this discussion that’s all one needs to know.)

Nice. Minecraft used to be my go to answer for a first WASD game, too.

Lately, I recommend Mineclonia on Luanti, because it’s free and has stronger optimizations supporting weak laptops and big multiplayer servers. (It’s a popular Free Open Source Minecraft Clone).

This was really helpful. Thank you.

I remember those days, as well!

I’m with you.

Thankfully, corporate bullahit isn’t the only way to create a discovery algorithm.

I expect that we will have a diverse set of discovery algorithms available to opt into here, in a few years.

Any politician launching their own media network is a reprehensible piece of shit.

Prove me wrong.

I always wonder about the people who drop off just before finishing the game.

That’s me. It used to be common for games to have a sharp ramp up in challenge at the end boss, and I often don’t have the time to get through that.

So I habitatually abandon games when I feel close to the end, and I watch the ending on a stream, instead of playing it.

I realize that minimal research could tell me which games are which, but even less research finds me a decent stream of the game ending.

Thanks!

Voiding all IP law would cause a huge loss in the creative community.

I agree. I wouldn’t be in favor of “burn it down” if I thought we could negotiate better terms with our current IP oligarchs.

If people can no longer pay their bills by creating then they stop creating and work.

I’ll still be available to do creative work. It wouldn’t change my current work-for-hire efforts.

Very little valuable IP is held by actual creators, today.

Why dump years and your heart and soul into a great book just to have it distributed for free and be poor.

Are you an actual published creator, or a temporarily embarrassed future billionaire? Is there a version of success for you that isn’t just selling to a big IP company to get enough money to retire? That’s what it looks like, to me. The peak of my possible success would be to write something that threatens/tempts the big IP holders enough to force them to buy me out. If I don’t take the buy out, they eventually bury my thing with their advertising power.

I don’t really disagree with you. I’m actually in favor of keeping and fixing IP laws, if that’s possible.

But I believe the IP laws we have now only serve our billionaire employers. So, as a creator, I won’t fight to keep our current IP laws.

Your utopia is every creator’s nightmare.

I didn’t say “utopia”. We need IP laws. But since we continue to let Disney (and other mega corporations) dictate the entire terms of engagement - we need to bring “burning the whole thing down and starting over” into the list of options under consideration. It’s the only way to bring Disney back to the bargaining table, at minimum.

Edit: A more practical approach would be to disolve every company that has engaged in an illegal merger (most large US companies). But I think that’s actually harder to accomplish, today, than voiding all IP law. It’s a better option, if we can swing it. The necessary laws are already on the books, they’re simply un-enforced.

Is also very very queer tho JSYK

That could be our new Lemmy slogan.

There’s a couple of them, I think.

I found this one:

https://lemmy.ca/c/witchesvspatriarchy

Edit: Better link:

!witchesvspatriarchy@lemmy.ca

Thanks!

Also doesn’t the GPL use IP law for enforcement of copy left?

That’s very probably Jack Dorsey’s motive in this. Briefly void all IP law, then restore it in a messy way that leaves everything owned by his lawyers.

I’ve created lots of things. The moment I finish creating it, I sign over my IP rights in exchange for money for food, and never have a right to it again.

Without IP law, the thing I created would at least be in the commons where I can still legally use it.

(I agree with your point, some IP law could be better than none. But I’ll assert that a total void of all IP law would be better than what we have now.

And we need to theaten to void it all, to get the current rights holders to negotiate. Frankly, I don’t think they will. I think we need to void all IP law and then encourage the next generation to create some new IP law after we starve our current billionaires.)

(All this is in spite of my objection to being on the same side of any argument with Jack Dorsey. I have no illusion that his motives are pro-social.)

what stops them from replicating my thing with more money and resources?

That’s what happens today, anyway. Most of us cannot afford the lawyers to make the law work for us.

In contrast, if we re-use an innovation the billionaires have purchased, we go to jail.