F4stL4ne

Mandrake in 2003, I was young and didn't know what I was doing...

Mots people do care about privacy, but most people see more pressing issues that goes first. It's hard to care about something intangible when it's hard to have a roof over its head, or to pay the bills.

Also musicians won't hesitate to put their audience at risk. They doesn't care about what they're asking their audience, because they 'feel' like they have no choice. Which is objectively wrong.

And musicians are often ignorant about copyright laws, so how can they protect their audience if the don't know how to defend them self?

Yes or granting usage. Being an author isn't always about forbidding, it can be about changing the work or adapting it as well.

The author can defend the work against uses that would change the meaning of the work itself (integrity).

Lastly, the author can't deny the work is his own. And for a bunch of artist this is a bummer.

All this is more of an author's right thing, but I think it's slowly coming to copyright laws as well (online publication).

You need a law of some kind, that will make clear the relationship between the author and the work. A simple registry is just there to retain informations, it doesn't make magically people care about things... Laws are better for this.

Pretty much all this, plus:

• it's very well made for learning to dev,
• Unity is garbage,
• UE is soooo big.

The thing Godot is lacking is a real good way to work on adaptative music and sound design.

Copyright laws, specially author's right, have one good reason to exist : it legally tied up a work with a person or an entity. This allows to create a responsibility about the work itself. For the audience, it allows the audience to held responsible the author for the content of the work. Before copyright laws a work of art was the voice of gods and such...

Unless everyone have an instance near home :) which is the case for me on Peertube, didn't checked for Lemmy though. I should check when I can. But for this to happen we need instances. Small, large, run by people, associations, communities, whatever.

Yes encoding is still a thing, but less analysis, online editing bullshit and advertising. So yeah Peeture is lighter than YouTube ;)

I agree that strict efficiency could be hard to tell on video diffusion only.

Google loves making new hardware/tech, but yeah they're not the only one to blame on this...

In some countries they don't have copyright, but they have author's right.

Author's right is apply to the work and is exclusively the property of the author until the end of times (literary). This right is apply automatically on the idea of the work (it doesn't have to be made flesh).

It's a moral right that make the author the only one to have paternity over the work and the keeper of the work's integrity.

It's also a patrimonial right as the copyright (the one to make money with), which is transferred to the children at death for 70 years.

The good thing with this is : the author is 100% responsible for what becomes of the work. The author have a hudge power. And artists should be held responsible for the things done with their work. The sad thing is authors mostly still behave has if the were exploited by labels and editors. The bad thing is the patrimonial rights should expire at death not 70 years later.

As others have said libre and open source licences are a way to gain that kind of control over the work under copyright laws.

Here is the study : https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/4238589?sommaire=4238635 It's in French, I didn't find something in English (maybe in the IPCC studies ). 47% of digital impact comes from users terminals (mostly from smartphone manufacturing).

Yes, but it doesn't mean low tech hardware should always be replace by new ones.

I honestly doesn't understand why everybody here seems to think efficiency=ecology. Mass manufacturing new hardware have a big ecological impact. As I said before things aren't magically replaced by better ones. Old unused tech ends up burning in pile in Africa or Asia.

What's the point of using things like YouTube that keeps promoting 4k (needs for better screen), instant access, streaming over download, advertising, things that have a judge ecological impact.

Here is the study : https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/4238589?sommaire=4238635 It's in French, I didn't find something in English (maybe in the IPCC studies ). 47% of digital impact comes from users terminals (mostly from smartphone manufacturing).

I agree with you, but YouTube is also a big part of the incentive of building more and more new hardware. Plus as I said before YouTube isn't just for hosting videos but also metrics tools, content id, advertising, editing tools and such... All this needs also power to run.

Did you have any data regarding packet distribution on google services? Last time I checked (about 4/5 years ago) an email send from a gmail to a gmail traveled about 1,5 of the earth size. Which is a lot for 2 laptops side by side in the same room.

Lastly you're trying to make this a debate only on the tech aspect but it is not. They are ethical points at stake and they are equally important I think.

When you have no ethics and just care about results you can also go fishing with dynamite...

That being said I didn't know dotnet was now open source. So that's a good point.