• General_Effort@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      Not really sure why there are no complaints about the story regarding the copyright suit against OpenAI.

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Probably because we don’t all have the energy to respond to every single inappropriate post. It’s tiresome, and many of us are busy.

        Also, lots of people see these posts by browsing their subscription feed, and don’t always notice which community each one comes from, so an errant post is easily overlooked if they’re also subscribed to a community where it would be appropriate.

        I do see some downvotes on an OpenAI post, though, so it hasn’t gone unnoticed. Don’t think you’re being singled out. It’s just that there are a lot of these lately, and the issue hasn’t been resolved yet, as you can see from the post I linked above.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          Well, this post got downvoted big-time, and the other one upvoted. Doesn’t really fit the energy explanation.

          There’s an obvious difference between this post, the OpenAI lawsuit post, and a lot of other popular copyright posts. This one is about how copyright owners are getting richer. The popular posts are about how the owners are being stolen from and exploited by tech companies like OpenAI or Spotify. Aww. Poor souls need more money. Boom times gotta boom.

          • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            There’s also the fact that humans have emotional reactions to things they see, often reacting immediately (with votes or otherwise) before considering whether it was on-topic for the channel that brought it to them. This overlaps what I described in my second paragraph, above.