On its face I’ve always liked the micro-payment notion where readers pay per-item. Obviously no idea if it pencils out, what price would need to be, and assumes it’s frictionless enough to appeal. No getting around the economics of subscriptions maxxing out fast. I don’t recall a serious attempt.

@profgalloway.com

Fantastic aesthetic.

(Sadly I have no answers—but thanks much for putting this nifty photo account on my radar.)

What if instead — hear me out — they spent $499M litigating against this to keep those chumps tied up for several years *and* likely achieve a precedent for everyone else to cite. They’d still have $52.5B to go towards their monthly bills…

I heard there are -160 whale boat captains who can use Murkowski’s clause, so she voted yes in exchange for ~checks math~ a 6.6m tax break which saves *maybe* 1M in taxes?! Total. For all of them. And probably less. Vs estimated 17M people who will be booted off Medicaid including in her own state.

I’m sure it’s not trivial but between Signal-type anonymity tech, map APIs, and millions of motivated people with cell phones, it seems plausible to create an app to coordinate a massive neighborhood watch with more than one camera on these guys, wherever they go 24/7, with live location updates.

@knibbs.bsky.social (I rudely failed to compliment and thank you for the piece, let’s chalk it up to character limit, pun intentional. Thanks!)

Ha right, Steamboat Willie is fair game. Thx for education.

I see. So - asked reductio ad absurdum, not combatively - every time a child draws Mickey Mouse outside an educational setting, they are technically infringing?

(Whether they have permission to train on it seems a different question, and is the tack taken in other suits; but not one I noticed in this article.)

I’m confused: if I render Darth Vader (with or without AI) and try to sell it, I am certainly infringing. But if I draw Darth Vader and just admire it, what is the infringement? Just the fact an AI (or pen) *can* infringe doesn’t seem conclusive so much as what the user does with it?

Maybe I’m a softy, but I’m in the ballpark of *any endeavor which evokes an emotional response in the beholder.* So chess can move the viewer the same as painting or poetry in that way. I’m probably agnostic on the question of intent also, so the right dam can be breathtaking, intended or not.

I would happily pay a subscription for BS, and also for anybody else’s ATProto server that was running a good railroad. (I am in that camp that thinks the original sin of the internet was choosing ads over subscriptions as the primary model.)

IANAL but reading through this 12406 it seems to end by saying “Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States…” How does that square here when Newsom is seemingly not involved?