GroggyGuava

joined 1 year ago
[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

What browser would you recommend then?

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Am I the only fucking rational person here

No, no I don't think so

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which he literally answers in the comment you questioned him on. You asked him something after he explained what you then asked.

That's braindead, and not because I "disagree" with your question, whatever that means.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The sentence they wrote right before your quoted sentence answers your braindead question.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You need to expand on how learning from something to make money is somehow using the original material to make money. Considering that's how art works in general, I'm having a hard time taking the side of "learning from media to make your own is against copyright". As long as they don't reproduce the same thing as the original, I don't see any issues with it. If they learned from Lord of the rings to then make "the Lord of the rings" then yes, that'd be infringement. But if they use that data to make a new IP with original ideas, then how is that bad for the world/ artists.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Are you ok? You seem upset

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Your first sentence describes your own comment.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Right yah I felt like that was probably the case when I was typing that honestly, that's my bad, I guess I should've said only really started taking off months ago, and is still rather small.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is a big assumption to make on such a young site.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yah no shit I didn't say I'm starving bc of him. I asked for someone to make it make sense. Which you haven't, instead you went with "wah wah go use something else then" - really constructive conversation, why raise complaints about things that could be better? Why try to push for improvements in something you like/care about, that's what you're arguing for me to do. "Pay for it or shut up", how about I don't pay, and instead voice my opinion on the Internet like the sites designed for.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

My issue with lemmy being young isn't the lack of content, it's that he's selling a "lifetime" option on something that's barely been around long enough to know we'll keep using it/it'll be around in a year.

I completely agree that it should be sub $10.

[–] GroggyGuava@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

£13??

Mine is $20 for the remove ads option, how does that make sense?

view more: next ›