You big delulu bro…
You’re so culturally illiterate you can’t see past your western European garden wall to the broader world around you.
You big delulu bro…
You’re so culturally illiterate you can’t see past your western European garden wall to the broader world around you.
DanceMomsSavedMe@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I noticed you didn’t have an answer to burning Picasso’s or other artists work after they die.
Why?
Someone bought it from them but should that have given them the right to hang it on their wall until they die? They didn’t paint it. Picasso can’t make money off of it anymore.
Should that purchase have been taken away on expiration of the creator?
TimothyOilypants@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
There would be absolutely nothing wrong with Picasso or DaVinci burning their works, and MANY artists throughout history have done just that. Look at Banksy’s “Love is in the Bin” for a modern take. I really don’t care what other people do with their art, its none of my business; this seems to be the core issue most of you are struggling with.
I have no expectation of finding like minds in online gaming communities for exactly the reasons of proportionality I have already stated. Gaming media, and gaming social media is a poor approximation of the opinions of the majority of gamers, as they don’t engage in either.
I am here explicitly to engage with fundamentalism as its a good reminder of how rigid and irrational people can get when they let their emotions dictate their opinions and actions. See you are emotionally invested in the outcome of this physical media issue. I literally do not care what happens. In some ways, the public (albeit minority) discourse around this issue is performative, and arguably functions as an extension of entire video game art ecosystem; we are both taking part in a collaborative performance right now.
DanceMomsSavedMe@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
That’s not what I asked. I asked you if the works they sold to others during their lifetimes should have been burned when they died. They are the original IP creators/holders. That’s very different from the artist themselves doing it, it is having another party let’s say the art fair where Picasso or whoever originally sold the artwork. When Picasso dies that market comes in and burns the work you bought. You support that?
If your answer is yes, then you’re even more out if line for calling me culturally illiterate
Even if you don’t care what happens with the phsycial medium if you are a gamer on PlayStation you will be affected by this outcome as it promotes anti consumer ideology at it’s core and when they see that this will work (for the ones who stay and accept this bs) more anti consumer practices will follow and you will be affected.
And if you don’t game on PlayStation, then wtf does your opinion matter on this it doesn’t even affect you at all.
TimothyOilypants@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Are you under the impression that Sony wants to come into your house and destroy all you old discs?
This example is still a false equivalency, no matter how many times you and others use it…when you purchase a digital license for a piece of software, you are not buying the canvas. You are buying a ticket to an exhibition.
That exhibition requires electricity, security, and ongoing staff labor to keep the building open. When the gallery can no longer afford the operating costs to pay that staff, they close the doors. They aren’t “burning” the art, the event is simply over. You are throwing a philosophical tantrum because you think your one-time ticket purchase means the gallery is legally obligated to stay open and pay its workers to maintain the exhibit for the rest of your life.
To your other point, I own every game console every created, from the Magnavox Odyssey to the PS5 Pro. I use all of them at various points, and engage with mobile and web-based gaming. I’ve been doing this for a LONG time and there are HUNDREDS of games I have played, adored, and will never be able to experience again and that is not only perfectly acceptable, it is beautiful.
Art. Is. Ephemeral.