#otherwise it's hard NOT to create a derivative work

[beybuniki]

one thing i noticed (form personal experience and by observing other artists) is that the longer you draw and create, the more boring it gets to simply replicate references, especially when it comes to characers' fashion choices.

with bnha, i keep mine pretty simple and basic because teens ARE very trend-loyal, but mainly im just lazy lol, but when i AM motivated, i love to think about characters' personal style, what could influence them, but also more trivial things such as budget into account, which is why i love to draw Deku in basic tees or clothes provided by his school (while bakugo gets to wear ed hardy and shoto wears arcteryx). i also love to limit the items like its just more realistic to me when someone as ordinary as deku wears the same 5 crewnecks all the time

which brings me to my actual point, namely that the more frequently you draw, the more you learn to do research andto combine your findings into sth new rather than staying faithful to one reference, and i think that's what makes good art so good, being able to draw inspiratioin from all kinds of niches and creating something that feels very authentic and suspends the spectator's disbelief. sometimes i see art and i know exactly which fashion editorial or which kpop idol was referenced, and I'm not insinuating these are bad things i do that too (less frequently now but i sure did!), my point is it's kind of nice to see how ALL artist start out with rather derivative art but eventually move on to create more authentic art that is less about drawing beautiful and perfect people and more about trying to individualize them and that ALSO means giving them weird clothes, scars, asymmetric eyes, a receding hairline etc. like drawing the same beautiful character 200 times gets so boring and it's just more fun to try and make them a bit more human

#i do have a lot of fashion headcanons but i rarely actually draw like that im so lazy #and again im also still stikcing to references and sometimes pretty closely #but this is an observation that i like to think about #as i said i just love artists that draw from a big and diverse source of references and inspirations #and the same applies to other forms of art as well ofc #just because you enjoy one genre and want to write in that genre doesnt mean you should limit your knowledge and inspiration to that genre #its pretty detrimental like you have to read ALL kinds of things #otherwise it's hard NOT to create a derivative work #and you see that with a lot of mangas #like you can kinda tell which battle shonen mangkas are only into other battle shonen and which ones are well read overall #SORRY #or when people who only read fics write their first original story and its an apposition of tropes #my point is its important to dabble in all kinds of niches #dont aim for perfect skills in one niche i think its more fun and beneficial to give everything a try

[dedalvs]

I don't think that any of your conlangs are progressive enough to express being trans, but if they were, how would they? What about other gender/sexuality things?

That first clause is quite a thing to say. Languages aren't progressive. Their users may be, but the languages aren't anything. They're just languages. If you mean they're not modern (i.e. a lot of the languages I create are for cultures that are somewhat antiquated compared to our world), this is true, but that doesn't necessarily mean the languages won't have terminology for different gender identities.

There is a major assumption here, though. My understanding (and please do note: I am a cis man; please feel free to correct), cis and trans individuals, as opposed to nonbinary and genderfluid, are similar in that neither have any doubt about what gender they are, identifying with either male or female. So if any language I've created has a word for "man" or "woman", then there's sufficient vocabulary for a trans individual to express their identity that way.

However, there is a terminological difference, and it's both an individual choice and societal preference: Whether to identify as one's chosen gender identity, as trans, or both (e.g. "I am a woman", "I am trans", or "I am a trans woman"—and then preferring to use one of those or all of those, or some other combination of the three). My personal language preference (as a user and language creator) is fewer distinctions are better (why have three third person singular pronouns—or four or twelve—when you can have one?), because it's less to memorize, less work to use, and demands less specificity of the user—and allows the hearer/reader to make fewer assumptions. Unless the situation calls for it (e.g. the gender system hard-coded into Ravkan in Shadow & Bone), I prefer lumping rather than splitting. This is especially useful as I'm often not in charge of the culture I create languages for.

For example, the languages I've created for A Song of Ice and Fire were for cultures created and maintained by George R. R. Martin. Whatever cultural innovations I have made in creating the languages are, at best, pending—that is, true until George R. R. Martin says otherwise, which he is free to do at any time, as it's his world. As a result, I don't feel confident enough to say what life is like for a trans individual in his world, and how that might be reflected in the languages there. There's simply not enough information.

Where I might be in charge of the culture, you do know my preference now (i.e. fewer distinctions), but, as I am not trans, I'd prefer to leave it to the trans community to decide, and then do what I can to support those decisions linguistically (i.e. to make it work within the language). Any term chosen highlights some aspect of the experience while downplaying others. In English, trans, coming from transition, highlights the change from one identity to another. Other ideas for how to come up with a term might be using a root that refers to "true", highlighting the transition to one's true gender expression. Perhaps another root to look for would be "choose", framing it as one's chosen gender expression—IF one wishes to look at it that way.

In many ways, both the term and the experience are highly individual, and it's difficult to come up with a blanket term and say "this is the term". It's especially difficult since this isn't a life experience I share. It feels both disingenuous and a bit icky to come up with a term to describe an experience that is decidedly not my own.

My own preference in this regard is a twofold approach:

Allow trans users of whatever language to figure out what term works for them, and then support them in creating a term that obeys the various language rules (i.e. the phonology is correct, derived words are derived correctly, etc.). Those users, however, will be operating under the same "rules" that I operate under, e.g. the one who's creating the culture has the final say, if they care to weigh in, and so the result may end up not being canon, at which point it's up to the user to decide whether they care or not. (Note: I shouldn't have to explain it here on Tumblr, but, of course, you don't have to care if the creator of the canon says something isn't so, no matter how many billions they have.)

Allow polysemy. There will never be a term that is THE term. It may be an individual's preferred term, but someone else may like another, in which case it should be allowed.

A very important language-specific note (and the same is true of fandom, generally). By agreeing to work within a language, we're essentially agreeing to rules of a game. The rules can always be broken. When rules are broken, the question language users have to answer is if they've been broken so egregiously that they're no longer playing the game, or if it's fine. For example, if you look at fanfic, there's plenty of fanfic with gender-swapped characters, or the same characters in a radically different setting. Some readers may decide they don't want the characters to be gender-swapped. Others may decide that if it's not in the same setting they're not interested. And that's fine! Both the writers and the readers are deciding which rules of the game can be broken while still calling it the same game. This works very, very well so long as no one gets mad at anyone else. If someone says, "I don't enjoy this because it breaks the rules in a way that ruins my enjoyment", that's perfectly fine. If that same person says, "You're not allowed to break the rules in this way", that's not fine.

So hopefully this all makes sense. And, furthermore, when I say I want to support those who wish to create their own terms, I do mean it. If anyone has suggestions or needs help coining a possible word, feel free to message me! But do bear (2) above in mind. I'm not going to say any term is THE term, and have that be the end of it. It'll be one possibility amongst a rainbow of possibilities.

#conlang #language #lgbtq+ #trans #nonbinary #grrm #asoiaf #shadow and bone #shadow & bone #s&b #grishaverse #genderfluid

[dailyadventureprompts]

Tableskills: Creating Dread

I've often had a lot of problems telling scary stories at my table, whether it be in d&d or other horror focused games. I personally don't get scared easily, especially around "traditionally horrifying" things so it's hard for me to recreate that experience in others. Likewise, you can't just port horror movie iconography into tabletop and expect it to evoke genuine fear: I've already spoken of being bored out of my mind during the zombie apocalypse, and my few trips into ravenloft have all been filled with similar levels of limp and derivative grimdark.

It took me a long time (and a lot of video essays about films I'd never watched) to realize that in terms of an experience fear is a lot like a joke, in that it requires multiple steps of setup and payoff. Dread is that setup, it's the rising tension in a scene that makes the revelation worth it, the slow and literal rising of a rollercoaster before the drop. It's way easier to inspire dread in your party than it is to scare them apropos of nothing, which has the added flexibility of letting you choose just the right time to deliver the frights.

TLDR: You start with one of the basic human fears (guide to that below) to emotionally prime your players and introduce it to your party in a initially non-threataning manor. Then you introduce a more severe version of it in a way that has stakes but is not overwhelmingly scary just yet. You wait until they're neck deep in this second scenario before throwing in some kind of twist that forces them to confront their discomfort head on.

More advice (and spoilers for The Magnus Archives) below the cut.

Before we go any farther it's vitally important that you learn your party's limits and triggers before a game begins. A lot of ttrpg content can be downright horrifying without even trying to be, so it's critical you know how everyone in your party is going to react to something before you go into it. Whether or not you're running an actual horror game or just wanting to add some tension to an otherwise heroic romp, you and your group need to be on the same page about this, and discuss safety systems from session 0 onwards.

The Fundamental Fears: It may seem a bit basic but one of the greatest tools to help me understand different aspects of horror was the taxonomy invented by Jonathan Sims of The Magnus Archives podcast. He breaks down fear into different thematic and emotional through lines, each given a snappy name and iconography that's so memorable that I often joke it's the queer-horror version of pokemon types or hogwarts houses. If we start with a basic understanding of WHY people find things scary we learn just what dials we need turn in order to build dread in our players.

Implementation: Each of these examples is like a colour we can paint a scene or encounter with, flavouring it just so to tickle a particular, primal part of our party's brains. You don't have to do much, just something along the lines of "the upcoming cave tunnel is getting a little too close for comfort" or "the all-too thin walkway creaks under your weight ", or "what you don't see is the movement at the edge of the room". Once the seed is planted your party's' minds will do most of the work: humans are social, pattern seeking creatures, and the hint of danger to one member of the group will lay the groundwork of fear in all the rest.

The trick here is not to over commit, which is the mistake most ttrpgs make with horror: actually showing the monster, putting the party into a dangerous situation, that’s the finisher, the  punchline of the joke. It’s also a release valve on all the pressure you’ve been hard at work building.

There’s nothing all that scary about fighting a level-appropriate number of skeletons, but forcing your party to creep through a series of dark, cobweb infested catacombs with the THREAT of being attacked by undead? That’s going to have them climbing the walls.

Let narration and bad dice rolls be your main tools here, driving home the discomfort, the risk, the looming threat.

Surprise: Now that you’ve got your party marinating in dread, what you want to do to really scare them is to throw a curve ball. Go back to that list and find another fear which either compliments or contrasts the original one you set up, and have it lurking juuuust out of reach ready to pop up at a moment of perfect tension like a jack in the box. The party is climbing down a slick interior of an underdark cavern, bottom nowhere in sight? They expect to to fall, but what they couldn't possibly expect is for a giant arm to reach out of the darkness and pull one of them down. Have the party figured out that there's a shapeshifter that's infiltrated the rebel meeting and is killing their allies? They suspect suspicion and lies but what they don't expect is for the rebel base to suddenly be on FIRE forcing them to run.

My expert advice is to lightly tease this second threat LONG before you introduce the initial scare. Your players will think you're a genius for doing what amounts to a little extra work, and curse themselves for not paying more attention.

Restraint: Less is more when it comes to scares, as if you do this trick too often your players are going to be inured to it. Try to do it maybe once an adventure, or dungeon level. Scares hit so much harder when the party isn't expecting them. If you're specifically playing in a "horror" game, it's a good idea to introduce a few false scares, or make multiple encounters part of the same bait and switch scare tactic: If we're going into the filthy gross sewer with mould and rot and rats and the like, you'll get more punch if the final challenge isn't corruption based, but is instead some new threat that we could have never prepared for.

Art

#tableskills #horror #spooky #halloween #the magnus archives #dm tip #dm advice #dm tips

[quinloki]

serious question for you and other fanfic authors, is it bothersome to like, binge leave comments of an authors work? like does seeing the same name comment the same type of thing on fics ever annoy you? I have authors I am obsessed with but I don't want to seem creepy or annoying

With very rare exceptions (and everything has exceptions so don't fret overmuch), artists love feedback. And when I say feedback, I don't mean critique - there's a time and place for that and that's never after something has been posted/shared. (the one caveat being if it's explicitly requested by the artist.)

When I say feedback I mean, if you liked it, say something.

It's okay to not like something you've read/seen/watched, but in those cases just don't share it, don't like it, and don't recommend it - if it really bothers you, block the source and move on. Leaving a negative comment could cause unintended consequences, so I would personally recommend avoiding them.

But if you liked it - whatever shape that took - leaving a comment is a wonderful thing. Sharing it is too! You don't even have to say anything if you don't know what to say.

BUT! To get to your specific concern - "seeing the same comment, the same type of things on fics, ever annoy you?"

If you see something and see comments are left and those comments are what YOU would also want to comment, then comment. You can even say "I know everyone else has this but," and then say your piece.

I love stuff like that personally. I love having created something that provokes a steady reaction across all sorts of people. It means, intentionally or not, I managed to nail a concept/emotion/response, and I can learn from that. (Or just bask in the chaos and enjoy my hard work XD )

If you feel like you're leaving the same comment on everything you read this, that's okay too \o/ Sometimes I don't know what to say, the details elude me, and there's nothing wrong with "I really enjoyed this, thank you" and leaving it at that.

I, personally, love the whole gamut - from the Play by Play where someone leaves a comment like they were taking notes and just highlighting all their favorite parts, to the Complete Feral Gremlin which is nearly incomprehensible except that they derived some deep emotion from what they read.

I will admit, there is one kind of comment that can be creepy, and I cannot think of any artist I know, be they pictures or words or otherwise, that enjoys it.

The comment that is sexual toward the author.

Look, for me, you can admit you needed a cold shower after reading something I wrote. You can even admit you had to go get your rocks off because it was so good. That can be a bit TMI for some peeps, so I wouldn't start there with a new author XD

But hitting on or propositioning a creator just because they do saucy content, is flat out creepy.

I've had people come to me with specific questions about kink and bdsm and I've stated I'm okay with it, and I've provided feedback in the ways they've wanted. I've had people come to me wanting advice on writing smut, and I don't mind giving that.

But woe unto the troglodyte who wanders into my sphere trying to hump my leg without my consent.

And speaking of consent, you can always ask a specific author before you leave a comment. There's nothing wrong with poking someone and saying "Are you okay with feral comments, or should I tone it down a little?" If you're concerned about it, an inquiry (like this!) never hurts.

But I tell you, I get one comment over and over on my Quicksand story that gives me Such Life.

"I wasn't a fan of Crocodile until I read this."

Ah, that's the good stuff.

#quin answers #anon asks #quin maybe gloats a little #ahem. #It's a good question though! #I hope it answered your concern #if you need/want clarification don't hesitate to ask =3

[tamelee]

Personally I don’t really get people who say they acknowledge Sasuke and Naruto’s romantic bond but still ship Sasuke with a woman… Like, they saw that he was gay (he’s shown to not be attracted to women so he’s not bi) but kinda don’t care?

Actually I don’t really understand the whole shipping culture, or even mainstream fandom culture… I don’t know, I just don’t see the point in just making up content for pre-existing characters while completely destroying what made the characters unique in the first place by ignoring canon entirely (like crack-shipping). I get why people wouldn’t like everything about canon, it’s my case too, but if they don’t like anything about canon… Why are they here in the first place?

Nooo now I sound grumpy. I must be bothering you I’m so sorry 😭😭

Anyway, you’re amazing and I hope you know it 🥰

You don't sound grumpy to me dw 🫶

Well, I don't believe such ships have much to do with Canon either way. And I doubt all of them hate Canon per se, though some change 'Canon' to like Canon, which is funny. "This is my Canon." Yeah, not how it works, but ok- have your Canon your way ofc ┐(￣ヮ￣)┌

Side-note though, I don't think Sasuke even knows who Hinata is? 😆 It's as you say; crack-shipping. (I saw that giant/small-yaoi meme here on Tumblr again. No idea what it's called, and immediately thought; a yes, Sukuna and Levi. Kinda want to draw xD Makes no sense at all.) A lot of Headcanon is derived from personal... ideas/desires/inspiration or self-inserting reasons? (Isn't that exactly what 'x-reader' fics are?) Or even trend-posting. As much as characters are used to tell a story for the original author/creator (they're essentially tools), do fans use them to create new ideas. "Ah yes, we all know this character, let's create something around it simply because I want to." Which is completely fine, right? Look at rare pairs. And to be fair, a lot of content, fictional writing and art aren't even based on canon either. The closest thing through fan-work are Manga analyses or meta's, even panel redraws- stuff like that. People adapt 'canon' into fanwork through various degrees or sometimes ditch it altogether. Nsfw/spice is by default made up and entirely Headcanon :') (Though personality can be depicted in a way ig, through expression/behavior and whatnot.)

I totally get what you mean though, although I guess I'm caught up in fandom-culture now. Personally, I do like characters as 'canon' as possible, but it really depends. For some Animanga I don't really care. I think I ship pretty much all TR/BlueLock-characters for literally no reason, but I wouldn't claim it to be Canon in any way (˚☐˚! )/

However, I don't like it when Naruto and Sasuke's characters are butchered. Made-up context or not. The originals are so special to me and it's the reason why I'm a fan, though I don't mind too much in fics, depending on the story. I find it hard to feel the same when they've practically become someone's OC's with only the same name and design. I can't even read height/age-differences because I can't imagine it xD But anyway, this all includes "official" work made for financial/marketing reasons also- especially those damn novels. Those never have anything to do with canon, nor does it align with it. No matter how passionately people claim otherwise.

I'm only a tiny bit petty about it >< u&me grumpy 🤝 And aahhww I don't actually, you should see me sitting here in giant red Christmas socks and a glittery green sweater that's kinda itchy tbh. I don't really feel anything other than those glitters annoying me every 3 seconds... which reminds me I should change -.- anw thankyou <3

#asktamelee #fandom talk #shipping talk #btw I lost a bet #and I have to read a x-reader fic #is there... I dunno #one that is #okay'ish #I mean I'm very sure the authors are amazing #and write really well #but ykwim #pls not one that is too long ;-; #I've read one a while ago #where I was a little princess #and I had a bodyguard #amazing story #but omg did I get annoyed with myself #why DID I SAY THAT #wow

[rollercoasterwords]

Hey there!

I've seen a blanket statement for translation, but do you also permit podfics being created for your works? In theory I would be interested, but I would like to record it first and then post it, because otherwise I'd be afraid that I can not finish it.

If you don't like podfics being created of your works that is also totally fine!!

I hope.you have great day and thank you for writing a ATYD version from Sirius's POV (he's my favourite character) 💞

yes, podfics r fine! generally speaking i am a-okay w any form of derivative work of my fics just as long as everything is kept on ao3 (although i know w podfics this might look a little different) + there’s no profit involved. i just ask that u give me credit as the og writer, and if it’s anything 2 do w atydsp that u credit mskingbean89.

if u do end up making a podfic + post it on ao3 in some way u can check the box that says the work was inspired by another fic + put mine down, and then i can link back to it ! otherwise i have a hard time keeping track lol

#ask #atydsp

[stick-named-figure]

🗣️👀

ask list

anon this is like pandora's box of questions. i still have like 5 essays i want and need to write about. like. here i'll put some mini analyses under the cut.

parkour, what it says about how the color gang handles problems, and also how they carry themselves

yes i want to write another essay on parkour. like. god. parkour is a fucking goldmine into how the sticks process getting around and how they handle competition, winning, and (very literally) obstacles.

like that green jumps over yellow's hands on the ironbars course, or that red and blue (despite punching each other every opportunity they get) aren't that competitive with each other, often being more cautious about getting around over speed.

PLUS how they planned each escape from the endless loop. like that it shows off green's ambidexterity or that orange's a very fast thinker!

god i love parkour so much. so much 😭

note block universe, the whole thing

like i've been planning this essay since i first saw episode 29 and it WILL get done some day i swear. there's just so much about it. i was listening to big band villagers today and like, there's this shared bass line between a trombone and a tenor sax i had never consciously noticed! it's really good! like aaron grooves and scott buckley just went SO hard in this and i can't possibly overstate that.

ALSO there's just. all of green's character building leading up to this episode? like obviously the note block episodes are part of that and that green's musical skill is a pivotal part of it. but there are other things that are insanely important to why note block universe works the way it does, most notably being green's ability to mimic and copy.

in the second build competition episode (episode 17: build battle), we see it very clearly that green is good at deriving other's works. green's first move is making banners for their build of the combine (it's a pretty cute vehicle ngl), which isn't something you can really... do unless you have a very good idea as to what you're building (or it's already built). green keeps looking over at blue's build! (it could be seen as them looking at the image. it was probably that too but i can't look at green's build and explain it any other way ngl).

there's also that alan made blue's build worse on purpose in the first build competition (episode 2) so that green's would look better. that doesn't quite have anything to do with what i'm saying about green but it's funny as fuck. sorry blue, you're too good at building so we had to nerf you.

but anyway, green's ability to mimic and improvise on what someone is doing is pivotal, like how they instantly rephrase their question to the baby zombie to match their genre.

i have SO much more to say on it. the essay's gonna come in like... at least three parts because i have a lot to say and it'd become too directionless otherwise.

king in general

OK LOOK. my obsession with king is a little embarrassing and i'm not even sure i can fully explain it but like. there's a lot to talk about their character and there's plenty i just made up. it is that deep, actually.

like how king would rather destroy an entire world than process their trauma and emotions. i think that's really funny (<- closest word for "i think that's terribly human of them and also tragic").

plus i think that king's intelligence is kinda... glossed over in a manner? obviously we have no clue on HOW much king had to teach themselves but it's insanely impressive to learn enough physics in the span of... say a year or two to create that staff.

i estimate the time between gold's death and king's entry to the nether to be at least half a year, since the warden exists (first in-game appearance in february 17, 2022) and the version of minecraft gold died in has since been changed to be 1.17.0 (released june 8, 2021). i kinda... have to ignore the desktop dates, since if the dates were true the series wouldn't be possible (first seen date is june 12, 2021 [episode 25], last seen date is june 14, 2021 [episode 30]). plus... a week-ish turnaround from gold dying to king creating the staff just. idk! i can't suspend my disbelief enough for that! i literally have to make it be a few months at least.

plus... if it's only been a week or so since gold died... it makes their relationship with purple like... uncomfortable. like more so. it's... i don't like rating coping mechanisms. it feels unproductive, y'know? but like... finding a new kid to project your "my kid died" feelings onto, especially one who has previously been abused isn't the... best way to cope. it has to be longer for me to be able to buy into their found familial dynamic.

#ask game answer #answer #anon #self post #avm #this really was pandora's box! i fully believed it was a year or so since gold died! #alan's asking me to accept that gold died as little as a few DAYS before s3? #cannot do that sir #cw death mention #avm king orange #avm mango #blorbo posting #musing

[option-monad]

a lot of people seem to be very mad in one direction or another about the stablediffusion class action but nobody is being very specific, so i decided to have a look at the actual text itself

caveats:

i am not a lawyer. i have at most a passing interest in reading legal documents. class actions tend not to be super hard to read, but i might still be getting this wrong

i am an expert in computer science. i do research for a living.

i am not an expert in specifically machine learning or related fields, i am mostly working on things i’ve picked up from colleagues who are. i feel pretty confident in claiming to have an above-average amount of knowledge about it, though.

with that out of the way, i think the shortest conclusion i can get from this is: some parts reasonable, some parts questionable, some parts absolutely terrible. mixed bag. let’s look at some details:

i’ll skip to section ix, claims for relief, since that’s where they get to the fucking point. there are 4 different allegations being made here, starting with this one:

COUNT I DIRECT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 17 U.S.C. §§ 106, et seq

this is mostly an allegation that the defendants infringed copyright by scraping images from the web and using them in commercial products without first obtaining a license, which is broadly a pretty reasonable case as far as i can tell. inclusion in training data can reasonably be read as a “use”, and selling the output of a model trained on that data can reasonably be read as “commercial use”.

they’re being pretty broad about what exactly was infringed on here, some of it appealing to things which aren’t typically seen in licensing terms specifically:

155. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs or the Class to train any machine learning, AI, or other computer program, algorithm, or other functional prediction engine using the Works.

[...]

157. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs or the Class to download, store, or distribute copies of the Works for use in training or otherwise creating AI Image Products.

a lot of the back and forth about this centers on “hey is that actually illegal or not”. i have no fuckin clue, but there are more specific allegations:

156. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to incorporate the Works into the products offered by Stability, DeviantArt, Midjourney, or related software applications.

[...]

158. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to create Derivative Works based upon the Works.

[...]

163. Defendants have infringed the Training Images for commercial purposes.

the dreaded DW term is showing up here, but the “commercial purposes” line explicitly states that this was not, in fact, covered by fair use. this is probably one of the better arguments here: defendants incorporated the plaintiff’s works into the training dataset, trained a model over that dataset, and rented out the subsequent model. the suit argues that this is direct copyright infringement, and i don’t disagree... except in the case of deviantart, which appears to actually own the copyright for all works uploaded to it. if deviantart scrapes deviantart, that’s not actually illegal. if anyone else scrapes deviantart and doesn’t ask deviantart first, that is illegal, but they don’t need to ask individual artists. you don’t grant deviantart a non-transferrable license when you upload, unlike other websites that offer image hosting. they just own that stuff, sorry.

then there’s this argument:

159. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to distribute the Works.

[...]

166. Defendants’ AI Image Products contain copies of every image in the set of Training Images and are capable at any time of producing as output a copy of any of the Training Images.

i sincerely have no idea whether or not this claim is actually true. if “a copy” means a 1:1 reproduction, this becomes a pidgeonhole principle problem: if there are enough images in the training data that no single image compresses down to a unique prompt, then this is actually untrue. the model can’t retrieve the original because its weights have effectively been clobbered by another image with the same prompt. if “a copy” means a close enough reproduction of the original, like a trace or something... yeah, maybe? it depends? you start running into some interesting questions if you ever try to do this deliberately to a very large model, so if the argument here is that someone could ask the model for a perfect reproduction of a specific image and get that image, then that’s probably wrong. it might accidentally spit out something visually very similar for the right prompt, but at that point we’re in much greyer territory about how legal that should be. a random visual noise generator could theoretically also do that.

there’s also some arguments here about how the output of the models are being used:

165. Defendants’ AI Image Products produce digital images and other output that act as market substitutes for the underlying Training Images, thereby competing with Plaintiffs and members of the Class.

as far as i can tell, this is quite specifically about using ai techniques to request “illustration in the style of [artist]” and pass that off as an original rather than directly commissioning the artist - there’s other language in one of the later sections referencing this. copyright law should probably not consider a commission with the request “please illustrate this in the same kind of style as julie bell” to be an infringement of julie bell’s copyright, because frankly fantasy novel covers are getting boring enough as it is. on the other hand, having a tool to automatically pretend to be julie bell is somewhat different... but good luck making a rigid distinction between those two.

moving on, we’re now at the second subsection.

COUNT II VICARIOUS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 17 U.S.C. §§ 106, et seq.

oh boy. this is a short subsection, and they get to the point mercifully quickly:

171. Individuals have used AI Image Products to create works using the names of Plaintiffs and the Class in prompts and passed those works off as original works by the artist whose name was used in the prompt. Such individuals are referred to herein as “Imposters” By using a particular artist’s name, Imposters can cause the AI Image Product to rely more heavily on that artist’s prior works to create images that can pass as original works by that artist. These output images are referred to herein as “Fakes.”

[...]

173. Imposters have sold Fakes on ArtStation, Kickstarter, the Unreal Engine Marketplace, and elsewhere.

[...]

176. Defendants have directly and indirectly profited from acts of infringement by Imposters.

i do not know enough about u.s. copyright law to say anything about liability here, but the argument is clearly that works are being sold as “works by [artist]” and not “works in the style of [artist]”. that’s much more specific, and avoids some of the weird grey area problems the last section ran into.

next:

COUNT III VIOLATION of the DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT 17 U.S.C. §§ 1201–1205

this one’s pretty boring honestly, it’s mostly about stripping the copyright information from images when the models store em.

181. Defendants did not contact Plaintiffs nor the Class to obtain authority to remove or alter CMI from the Works within the meaning of the DMCA.

this is reworded several times in different points. and by “several” i mean many, many times. it reads extremely strangely, but maybe that’s just legalese. once again i don’t know how much water this holds, if it’s related to direct reproduction then possibly little, if it’s related to redistribution of the trained model then frankly i don’t know how these models are distributed, and in either case i don’t care.

COUNT IV VIOLATION of the STATUTORY RIGHT of PUBLICITY Cal. Civ. Code § 3344

alright this is where we get into big hmmmmm territory, as you can see by appealing specifically to state-local laws (seems a weird choice for a class action, since the class are international, but the fuck do i know).

203. Defendants appropriated Plaintiffs’ names to Defendants’ advantage, including for the purposes of advertising, selling, and soliciting purchases through Defendants’ AI Image Products[...]

[...]

205. There is a direct connection between Defendants’ misappropriation of Plaintiffs’ names and Defendants’ commercial purposes, because Defendants used Plaintiffs’ names to advertise art “in the style” of Plaintiffs’ work. Defendants used Plaintiffs’ names and advertised their AI’s ability to copy or generate work in the artistic style that Plaintiffs popularized in order to sell Defendants’ products and services. Defendants’ ability to market art similar to and associated with Plaintiffs’ names also enabled Defendants to establish an advantage over actual and prospective competitors.

[...]

212. Because of Defendants’ unlawful appropriation of Plaintiffs’ names, Plaintiffs have suffered injury. Plaintiffs have a right to protect the goodwill that is associated with their names, and that goodwill is compromised by a proliferation of AI-generated art created without Plaintiffs’ consent but associated with Plaintiffs’ names[...]

we’re back to the “in the style of” language, which runs into the main opposition that people have to these types of lawsuits: taking inspiration from a specific artist and being open about it should not leave you vulnerable to court cases. again, there’s an even chance that this is entirely arguing around the devaluation of the artist’s name as a brand, i’m not about to read the californian civic code, but fortunately the next section seems to be a repeat of this one:

COUNT V VIOLATION of the COMMON LAW RIGHT of PUBLICITY Common Law

oh no

215. Plaintiffs’ names and artistic identities are not limited to a specific copyrighted image or work developed by Plaintiffs. Rather, they extend to Plaintiffs’ entire corpus of work and allow consumers and the public to identify work “in the style of” Plaintiffs. Thus, Defendants did not only misappropriate work fixed in a tangible medium of expression, but also misappropriated Plaintiffs’ names and artistic identities.

216. Plaintiffs did not consent to Defendants’ use of their names or identities.

[...]

221. Because Defendants advertise the ability of their systems to generate artwork “in the style” of Plaintiffs’ work—and explicitly used Plaintiffs’ work to train the algorithms—the art generated by Defendants’ AI products is not transformative. Defendants’ misappropriation merely capitalizes on Defendants’ theft of Plaintiffs’ artistic work and the associated value of Plaintiffs’ names and identities.

this runs even closer to criminalising being explicitly inspired by another artist, and i hope it falls on its ass. there’s no text here that i can find which reasonably delineates this from publishing an artbook and acknowledging the influence of another artist in the preamble. i sincerely hope i’m misinterpreting this, because otherwise: bad! extremely bad! awful!

the rest of the sections aren’t as much of a rollercoaster, so i’m not going into them. one on unfair competition, which just reiterates the previous points, one on breach of contract by deviantart which i don’t think is actually true, and one final “please give money”. there’s no real conclusion here, i think we already ended with the biggest bang possible.

for scrolling this far, you have unlocked bonus content: extremely stupid points (greatest hits collection)

17. “Artificial Intelligence” or “AI.” AI is a software program that algorithmically simulates human reasoning or inference, often using statistical or mathematical methods.

i love everything about this. was this written on a fucking typewriter. has this person ever used a computer. jesus christ just refer to recurrent neural networks specifically don’t go back to the gofai definition for your “software program” unless you’re trying to sue the god damn lisp interpreter.

96. A latent-diffusion system can never achieve a broader human-like understanding of terms like “dog,” “baseball hat,” or “ice cream.” Hence, the use of the term “artificial intelligence” in this context is inaccurate.

everyone who tries to make this point should be compelled by a court to bring one dozen (12) small baked goods to their nearest academic department specialising in machine learning techniques. you should owe me damages for making me read this. you literally defined artificial intelligence above and it does not remotely relate to the points you’re trying to make here. fuck.

98. A human artist could illustrate this combination of items with ease. But a latent- diffusion system cannot because it can never exceed the limitations of its Training Images.

no, i am a human artist and there are many combinations of things i could not illustrate with ease. such as the person writing this ever having a coherent thought. beyond my capacity to even imagine, let alone illustrate.

185. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to train any machine learning, AI, or other pseudo-intelligent computer program, algorithm, or other functional prediction engine using the Works.

is “pseudo-intelligent computer program” a real legal term? please tell me it is. please tell me there’s a legal definition of pseudo-intelligent actually don’t there probably is and it just means autistic or some shit

199. Defendants conspired together and acted jointly and in concert pursuant to their scheme to commit the acts that violated the DMCA alleged herein.

imagining the little deviantart creacher conspiring a little scheme. very funny. yeah i don’t think anyone deliberately set up ml models to reproduce pictures without attaching the title, google images has that niche covered.

that’s it that’s the post.

[omniversalobservations]

Spider-Man: The Gathering of the Sinister Six (1999)

The Machiavelli Club, mentioned on pages 34-35 of Gathering of the Sinister Six, as well as pages 162-163 of Revenge of the Sinister Six, was founded by Professor James Moriarty, from the Sherlock Holmes stories "The Final Problem," "The Adventure of the Empty House," and the novel The Valley of Fear.  Its members include various rogues from comic books, movies, prose fiction, and so forth:

* The waiter at the Macchiavelli Club is Henry from Asimov's BLACK WIDOWER stories. * Wilson Fisk (The Kingpin) * Obadiah Stane (The Iron Monger) from Iron Man. * Gruber brothers: Anton Gruber first appeared in the prose novel Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp (a sequel to his homosexual murder mystery The Detective).  Anton Gruber was basically a Baader-Meinof/Red Army Faction-style terrorist.  He was renamed Franz Gruber for the film Die Hard, while his brother Simon appeared in Die Hard With a Vengeance. * Doctor Fu Manchu is obviously "the long-lived oriental gentleman" that the Gentleman refers to.  (Although later on it is said that the Gentleman harbors prejudice against the Chinese, he makes no snide remarks about Doctor Fu Manchu.)  The Gentleman believes that Doctor Fu Manchu is dead due to the events of Master of Kung Fu #118, though he showed up alive and well in Marvel Knights I #4.  Marvel currently refers to him as the Ghost, due to licensing issues. * Auric is Auric Goldfinger, from the Ian Fleming novel.  Auric is derived from the Latin word for gold, from which its elemental symbol, Au, is derived. * Lex is Lex Luthor. * Justin Hammer is an Iron Man villain. * "The German Herr Taubman."  An alias used by a recurring villain called "The Deaf Man" in "The 87th Precinct" novels by Ed McBain.  Great novels BTW.  (Taubman is German for deaf man as I recall.)  Here's a clip from a fan site. * The Wrightsville Diedrich Van Horn is from the Ellery Queen novel Ten Day's Wonder, written by Ellery Queen.  (Ellery Queen was a sleuth created by two cousins who adopted his name as their pen name.  He went to a town called Wrightsville for vacations.  In the movies, Ralph Bellamy played Ellery Queen-Bellamy also appeared in two Eddie Murphy movies as one of the Duke brothers.) * Ras is Ra's Al Ghul, from the Distinguished Competition. * Soze is from the film The Usual Suspects. * Hannibal is Hannibal Lecter, from the novel Red Dragon by Thomas Harris, and later Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal. * Carmen is Carmen San Diego from the computer game and cartoon show. * Mr. Glass is from the film Unbreakable, as played by Samuel Jackson. * Napier refers to the Jack Napier, the Joker, from the 1989 Batman film. * Ernst is Ernst Blofeld from the Ian Fleming novel Thunderball. * Randolph and Mortimer Duke are from two Eddie Murphy films, Trading Places and Coming to America.  While in both these films Randolph and Mortimer Duke, insider traders, were played by the same actors (Don Ameche and Ralph Bellamy), Eddie Murphy was not playing the same person in these films, which were otherwise unrelated.

Although not mentioned as a member of the Machiavelli Club, Caspar Gutman worked with the Gentleman in the past, per page 166 of Secret of the Sinister Six. Casper Gutman comes from the Dashiell Hammett novel The Maltese Falcon, published in 1929.

Source: Marvel Universe Appendix

Carmen Sandiego is part of the Machiavelli Club, along with Jack Napier, Hannibal Lecter and Mr. Glass. Among others. Moriarty was a founding member, and the Gruber Brothers and a villain from an Ellery Queen novel have been members. The Gentleman briefly converses with two brothers, Randolph and Mortimer, who made their money on the futures exchange, and wonders how they earned a place at the club as they are no more 'evil' than standard stockbrokers.

Though not mentioned by name, Clint Eastwood, Robert Downey Jr. and Sylvester Stallone are all heavily implied to be attending Brick Johnson's funeral.

The cast from Scooby-Doo shows up at the end of the final book.

The 27th Precinct's Detective Briscoe takes statements.

Dr. Christian Szell is an old associate of The Gentleman.

Quentin Beck passes Cassady and Jesse.

In the third book, the Gentleman credits the inspiration for his overall Evil Plan to be a late associate of his named Auric.

One of the police officers in the third book is implied to be the son of Marge Gunderson.

Source: TV Tropes

(image via Amazon)

#books #Spider-Man #Electro #Vulture #Doctor Octopus #Mysterio #Flint Marko #Kraven the Hunter #Sherlock Holmes #Die Hard #Fu Manchu #James Bond #Lex Luthor #The 87th Precinct #Ra's al Ghul #The Usual Suspects #Hannibal #Carmen Sandiego #Unbreakable #Joker #Trading Places

[titoist]

something that usually happens when i'm overwhelmed by the horrible conditions around me, is... a tendency to comfort myself with this thought, or derivatives which ultimately retain the same essential character: "if i am not happy with myself as i am now, then i probably don't need to worry, as the hardship i'm guaranteed to go through will very likely transform me into a completely different person, one likely to be more wizened or capable, possessing a certain awareness or foresight that i wouldn't otherwise have on account of it, etc..." & what i don't analyze or consider nearly enough is how similar this is to the sort of rhetoric inherent to "protestant work ethic"-type people - the same sort of subtly fascistbrained idea you find underlining the "hard times create strong men" idiom: that continued suffering is actually incredibly good, in some nebulous & undefined way. if i am going to get wiser & more aware as i age - which i suspect i will - then it'll be on account of continuously opening myself up to stimulating ideas to engage myself with... rather than just on account of bleeding to death on some imagined altar. though, if it's going to happen regardless, i guess i see the sense in making yourself at least feel a little good about it.

[taupewolfy]

ok so games i've played and enjoyed this year summerised! will literally be some short thoughts I'll really try to keep it brief since there is a lot lol (it's not going to be refined)

13 sentinels: dang i still need to finish this one - anyway if you played vanillaware before you'll probably know general things to expect. The story structure tbh reminds a lot of odin sphere but a hell of a lot more fluid within itself and your mileage may vary depending on how you like your sci fi stories (i really enjoy the unfloding of the mystery). Crazy good narrative design considering the 13 protags but pretty ok tactics combat. Hidden gem if anything

elden ring: Do i really need to talk about this one? It's great. Does some good stuff with the open world i enjoy (i usually do not click with open world well) was very fun to play a fromsoft game at launch completely blind if anything. Will never finish it as per usual with these types of games lol. Certainly not for everyone

ffxiv: have you heard of the critically acclaimed mmorpg- yeah anyway i really am not going go on anymore about this one since i liveblogged a lot of it but i've roped 3 other people into playing it over the last year so. I have no clue how it compaires to other mmos of its ilk.

signalis: AWOOOOOOOOOOGA. Seriously worth playing, especially if you want to try getting into surivival horror games or want to give them a go - feels old school but refined. Limitations work to it's advantage and it never feels reductive or derivative of its inspirations. The whole combine into something so unique and lasting.

Lunacid:Currently in early access - I tend to play this in short chunks wth large spanses of breaks inbetween - really fun to return to. Inspired by king's field and shadow tower but enough of it's own thing to feel great to play without prior knowledge of those two. Great atomsphere and i cannot understate how much i adore it.

unsighted: apparently i started playing this earlier last year but had a lot of on i forgot (and haven't finished it yet but want to) - don't let that sound like i didn't enjoy it though. The limited time mechanic is fantastic and well worth keeping on (i wouldn't call it punishing or anything of the sort, it feels more like it creates a soft goal-point for the player). Fantastic locomotive feel and combat is suuuuuuuper satisfying.

xanadu next: very old kinda clunky dungeon crawler (in terms of combat, less so in exploration). Oddly a cozy game for me. Really enjoy that loot is controlled by the order you kill enemies in a room in + keys can be carved from monster bones which is pretty cool (instead of buying them from the store, in which they go up in price per purchase).

halo 1: pretty good! i can understand it's influence but everytime i play it i think of all the boys in high school that talked about it lmaooo (last couple of levels feel pretty crunched so come across as weirdly hard)

Dmc trilogy: pretty good! despite my struggles with it, i still think the 1st one is my favourite to play. Really satisfying combat when it clicks on how to combat an enemy and very effortless at making you feel stylish while doing so

legend of heroes: trails in the sky: i need to return to this one - maybe fell off it because there was some casual, period typical (of the time of release) biphobia going on with some characters that made me feel very :/ but overall experience has been really great otherwise. Also kinda got cozy vibes depsite that

ultrakill: it hurt my hands real good (not a fun time in that regards)

in the drink: short fantastic underwater controls, super straightforward and very charming

#feels like a lot but tbh most of my time was spent in ring of eld and the 14 #taupe talks

[very-grownup]

'We kill ourselves,' said Buffo the Great. 'Often we hang ourselves with the gaudy braces from which we suspend those trousers loose as the skirts that Muslims wear lest the Messiah be born to a man. Or, sometimes, a pistol may be sneaked from the lion-tamer, his blanks replaced with live bullets. Bang! a bullet through the brain. If in Paris, you can chuck yourself under the Metro. Or, should you have been so lucky as to be able to afford mod. cons, you might gas yourself in your lonely garret, might you not. Despair is the constant companion of the Clown.

'For not infrequently there is no element of the /voluntary/ in clowning. Often, d'you see, we take to clowning when all else fails. Under these impenetrable disguises of wet white, you might find, were you to look, at the features of those who were once proud to be visible. You find there, per example, the aerialiste whose nerve has failed; the bare-back rider who took one tumble too many; the juggler whose hands shake so, from drink or sorrow, that he can no longer keep his balls in the air. And then what is left but the white mask of poor Pierrot, who invites the laughter that would otherwise come unbidden.

'The child's laughter is pure until he first laughs at a clown.'

The great white heads around the long table nodded slowly in acquiescence.

'The mirth the clown creates grows in proportion to the humiliation he is forced to endure,' Buffo continued, refilling his glass with vodka. 'And yet, too, you might say, might you not, that the clown is the very image of Christ.' With a nod towards the mildly shining icon in the corner of the stinking kitchen, where night crawled in the form of cockroaches in the corners. 'The despised and rejected, the scapegoat upon whose stooped shoulders is heaped the furry of the mob, the object and yet -- yet! also he is the subject of laughter. From what we are, we have chosen to be.

'Yes, young lad, young Jack, young First-of-May, we subject ourselves to laughter from choice. We are the whores of mirth, for, like a whore, we know what we are; we know we are mere hirelings hard at work and yet those who hire us see us as being perpetually at play. Our work is their pleasure and so they think our work must be our pleasure, too, so there is always an abyss between their notion of our work as play, and ours, of their leisure as our labour.

'And as for mirth itself, oh, yes, young Jack!' Turner to Walser and waving an admonitory glass at him. 'Don't think I haven't very often meditated on the subject of laughter, as, in my all too human rags, I grovel on the sawdust. And you want to know what I think? That they don't laugh in heaven, not even if it were ever so.

'Consider the saints as the acts in a great circus. Catherine juggling her wheel. St Lawrence on his grill, a spectacle from any freak-show. Saint Sebastian, best knife-throwing stunt you ever saw! And St Jerome, with his learned lion with the paw on the book, great little animal act, that, beats the darkie bitch and her joanna hollow!

'And the great ringmaster in the sky, with his white beard and his uplifted finger, from whom all these and many are other are less sanctified performers put on their turns in the endless ring of fire which surrounds the whirling globe. But never a giggle, never a titter up there. The archangels can call: "Bring on the Clowns!" until they're blue in the face, but the celestial band will never strike up the intro to "The March of the Gladiators" on its harps and trumps, never, no fear -- for we are doomed to stay down below, nailed on the endless cross of the humiliation of this world!

'The sons of men. Don't you forget, me lad, we clowns are the sons of men.'

The others all droned after him, in unison: 'We are the sons of men,' as in some kind of clerical response.

'You must know,' continued Buffalo to Walser in his graveyard imagination, 'you must know that the word "clown" derives from the Old Norse, '"klunni", meaning "loutish". "Klunni", cognate with the Danish, "klunter", clumsy, maladroit, and the Yorkshire dialect, "gormless". You must know what you have become, young man, how the word defines you, now you have opted to lose your wits in the profession of the clown.'

'A clown!' they murmured softly, dreamily amongst themselves. 'A clown! Welcome to Clown Alley!'

Meanwhile, to the accompaniment of Buffo's sermon, the meal went on. Spoons scraped the bottom of the earthenware bowls of fish soup; the spatulate, white-gloved hands reached for the shanks of black bread, food sad and dark as the congregation of sorrow assembled at the ill-made table. Buffo, scorning a glass, now tipped vodka straight from the bottle down his throat.

'There is a story told of me, even of me, the Great Buffo, as it has been told of every Clown since the invention of the desolating profession,' intoned Buffo. 'Told, once, of the melancholy Domenico Biancolette, who had the seventeenth century in stitches; told of Grimaldi; told by the French Pierrot, Jean-Gaspard Deburau, whose inheritance was the moon. This story is not precisely true but has the poetic truth of myth and so attaches itself to each and every laughter-maker. It goes thus:

'In Copenhagen, once, I had the news of the death of my adored mother, by telegram, the very morning on which I buried my dearly beloved wife who had passed away whilst bringing stillborn into the world the only son that ever sprang from my loins, if "spring" be not too sprightly a word for the way his reluctant meat came skulking out of her womb before she gave up the ghost. All those I loved wiped out in one fell swoop! And still at matinee time in the Tivoli, I tumble in the ring and how the punters bust a gut see. Seized by inconsolable grief, I cry: "The sky is full of blood!" And they laughed all the more. How droll you are, with the tears on your cheeks! In mufti, in mourning, in some low bar between performances, the jolly barmaid says: "I say, old fellow, what a long face! I know what you need. Go along to the Tivoli and take a look at Buffo the Great. He'll soon bring your smiles backs!

'The clown may be the source of mirth, but -- who shall make the clown laugh?'

'Who shall make the clown laugh?' they whispered together, rustling like hollow men.

- Nights at the Circus, Angela Carter

#quotations #clowns #nights at the circus #angela carter

[witoldwieslster]

ABOUT KNOWLEDGE AND SMART-ASSES…!

By Wieslster Witold

Translated by Brunhilde Miriam Bertotto

And other statements like “he thinks he knows everything”…

Why do we classify some people as smart-asses?

Does this happen in order to hide our own shortcomings?

Does this happen in order to justify us for not making any effort?

Does this happen because we don’t want to tuck up our sleeves and investigate?

However, some statement tells us that everything is inside of us and in our universe!

But where inside of us resides this marvelous knowledge?

Where and how can we retrieve this alleged knowledge?

Does it work like this: we do a headstand and “quickly toss it out”?

But, how do we acquire our knowledge?

Is it acquired through the alleged Akasha principle?

What exactly is this alleged Akasha principle so often mentioned in esoteric circles?

Can we see or touch this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the proprieties of this alleged Akasha principle?

How do we contact this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the requirements a person should have to contact this Akasha principle?

How and in what way can we distinguish whether the received information derives from the alleged Akasha principle or whether we’ll find the cause of this information inside of us?

Does not our consciousness filter everything?

And, above all – what is our consciousness like and how does it work?

Is it possible that our subconsciousness is involved, too?

What is our subconsciousness and what are its tasks inside a human being?

How does our subconsciousness work?

Can the universe be linked to our spirit/our soul or is it already continuously connected to our spirit/our soul?

Who knows which is the driving force in man, our spirit or our soul?

By the way, who knows whether there is a difference between spirit and soul, and if so what difference is it?

How are spirit and/or soul linked to the body?

What are the proprieties of the alleged spirit/the soul, or are they both the same, are they identical?

Do we know it better?

Isn’t it true that nobody can take our personal knowledge and experiences away from us?

So, why do we refuse to reflect on the experiences of others, why don’t we question them, why don’t we dig deeper in order to find out whether we have understood everything correctly and to learn how the other person had come to his/her knowledge?

Wouldn’t it be better for our personal maturation process to exchange ideas, opinions or new concepts about these topics in order to enrich our own knowledge?

Wouldn’t this be better than principally refuting everything different or strange only because we do not immediately understand it, or because the person in front of us seems weird and not trustworthy because he/she maybe does not harmonize with the information oscillating on our hard disk?

Wouldn’t these new ideas and viewpoints create new neuronal connections, and won’t they broaden our horizons of perception?

How could someone pretend to walk on the path of self-knowledge when he, at the same time, limits himself through his actions and does not tolerate new experiences because of his habitual behaviors?

As we can see, there have been given many clear statements about personal viewpoints, opinions, and convictions, but…does this correspond to a superior truth or do other people and books in most cases only assume this form of truth?

Or, has all this been our own idea?

Fortunately, on our planet there live abundantly different people, everyone has his/her personal experiences, knowledge and consciousness; it would otherwise be quite tiresome for us if we all had taken the same road!

What do we conclude from this?

Right, exchanging our experiences makes us all learn a lot from each other!

However, what are the requirements needed to do so?

What is it that hinders us to understand and accept other opinions?

Are these possibly our mental blocks, our traumata or our pride?

What is the opposite of pride?

What happens to us when we principally refuse other opinions and orientations?

Do we guess and believe to know it better, even without having made any detailed research in this or that field?

Or, do we have failed in clearing our understanding of dialogue and monologue?

Could it matter whether we have an open or a closed mind?

What exactly is it and how does it work?

What are the scientific research methods we could use to gain knowledge through experiences made on ourselves?

As usually done in the fields of research, shouldn’t we beforehand create a hypothesis of the object of studies?

And discuss the procedure only afterwards, and maybe procure some information on the object of research or create the necessary laboratory conditions?

How can we create a cause in the laboratory and then, hopefully, assist to its effects?

Is it possible to deduce the cause while assisting only to the effect?

There is, of course, a lot of information in the Worldwide Web; information on electricity, electromagnetism, and - let’s just think of the earth’s electromagnetic field in our solar system, and the electromagnetic sun storms which allegedly influence our earth, as well. Furthermore, there are the statements and regularities of quantum physics, where they even speak of dark matter, which supposedly connects everything in the universe, we included.

So, let’s suppose we are all connected, but how?

Is it necessary to explore the universe in order to understand all this or are there other possibilities?

Just to make a hypothesis, is not Man a universe of his own within the same universe?

It has been proved that there are electromagnetic oscillations inside of Man, but where do they come from, and what happens to them after death, how do they work inside of man, and can we see or touch them???

Or, are they similar to the electric current of our sockets, where we can only see the effect the moment we turn on the interrupter of something which is plugged into the power supply system?

What about our terrestrial atmosphere, does Man have anything similar?

Many people talk about the aura inside and around Man, but how can we explore the proprieties of this supposed aura, and how and through what agent are they generated?

What is its function in Man, and is there a possible interaction with other people because of the same aura?

If so, in what way?

Does the aura by chance possess the same alleged proprieties as the hypothetic dark matter in the universe, and is there a continuous interaction between the aura and this dark matter, as well?

However, as most of us know through medicine, every human being has the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous system…so, considering these nervous systems, how could we create with them an equation in relation to the universe, or is this impossible?

So, do we need the quantum physics to know ourselves, or are there alternative research methods to improve our true self-knowledge?

Doesn’t our reason tell us that it is better starting with the known Man and then penetrating into the unknown realm of Man, and maybe even the universe would explain it to us through a hypothesis, considering all its functions when we talk about the micro-cosmos and the macro-cosmos?

[psychical-researchs]

ABOUT KNOWLEDGE AND SMART-ASSES…!

By Wieslster Witold

Translated by Brunhilde Miriam Bertotto

And other statements like “he thinks he knows everything”…

Why do we classify some people as smart-asses?

Does this happen in order to hide our own shortcomings?

Does this happen in order to justify us for not making any effort?

Does this happen because we don’t want to tuck up our sleeves and investigate?

However, some statement tells us that everything is inside of us and in our universe!

But where inside of us resides this marvelous knowledge?

Where and how can we retrieve this alleged knowledge?

Does it work like this: we do a headstand and “quickly toss it out”?

But, how do we acquire our knowledge?

Is it acquired through the alleged Akasha principle?

What exactly is this alleged Akasha principle so often mentioned in esoteric circles?

Can we see or touch this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the proprieties of this alleged Akasha principle?

How do we contact this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the requirements a person should have to contact this Akasha principle?

How and in what way can we distinguish whether the received information derives from the alleged Akasha principle or whether we’ll find the cause of this information inside of us?

Does not our consciousness filter everything?

And, above all – what is our consciousness like and how does it work?

Is it possible that our subconsciousness is involved, too?

What is our subconsciousness and what are its tasks inside a human being?

How does our subconsciousness work?

Can the universe be linked to our spirit/our soul or is it already continuously connected to our spirit/our soul?

Who knows which is the driving force in man, our spirit or our soul?

By the way, who knows whether there is a difference between spirit and soul, and if so what difference is it?

How are spirit and/or soul linked to the body?

What are the proprieties of the alleged spirit/the soul, or are they both the same, are they identical?

Do we know it better?

Isn’t it true that nobody can take our personal knowledge and experiences away from us?

So, why do we refuse to reflect on the experiences of others, why don’t we question them, why don’t we dig deeper in order to find out whether we have understood everything correctly and to learn how the other person had come to his/her knowledge?

Wouldn’t it be better for our personal maturation process to exchange ideas, opinions or new concepts about these topics in order to enrich our own knowledge?

Wouldn’t this be better than principally refuting everything different or strange only because we do not immediately understand it, or because the person in front of us seems weird and not trustworthy because he/she maybe does not harmonize with the information oscillating on our hard disk?

Wouldn’t these new ideas and viewpoints create new neuronal connections, and won’t they broaden our horizons of perception?

How could someone pretend to walk on the path of self-knowledge when he, at the same time, limits himself through his actions and does not tolerate new experiences because of his habitual behaviors?

As we can see, there have been given many clear statements about personal viewpoints, opinions, and convictions, but…does this correspond to a superior truth or do other people and books in most cases only assume this form of truth?

Or, has all this been our own idea?

Fortunately, on our planet there live abundantly different people, everyone has his/her personal experiences, knowledge and consciousness; it would otherwise be quite tiresome for us if we all had taken the same road!

What do we conclude from this?

Right, exchanging our experiences makes us all learn a lot from each other!

However, what are the requirements needed to do so?

What is it that hinders us to understand and accept other opinions?

Are these possibly our mental blocks, our traumata or our pride?

What is the opposite of pride?

What happens to us when we principally refuse other opinions and orientations?

Do we guess and believe to know it better, even without having made any detailed research in this or that field?

Or, do we have failed in clearing our understanding of dialogue and monologue?

Could it matter whether we have an open or a closed mind?

What exactly is it and how does it work?

What are the scientific research methods we could use to gain knowledge through experiences made on ourselves?

As usually done in the fields of research, shouldn’t we beforehand create a hypothesis of the object of studies?

And discuss the procedure only afterwards, and maybe procure some information on the object of research or create the necessary laboratory conditions?

How can we create a cause in the laboratory and then, hopefully, assist to its effects?

Is it possible to deduce the cause while assisting only to the effect?

There is, of course, a lot of information in the Worldwide Web; information on electricity, electromagnetism, and - let’s just think of the earth’s electromagnetic field in our solar system, and the electromagnetic sun storms which allegedly influence our earth, as well. Furthermore, there are the statements and regularities of quantum physics, where they even speak of dark matter, which supposedly connects everything in the universe, we included.

So, let’s suppose we are all connected, but how?

Is it necessary to explore the universe in order to understand all this or are there other possibilities?

Just to make a hypothesis, is not Man a universe of his own within the same universe?

It has been proved that there are electromagnetic oscillations inside of Man, but where do they come from, and what happens to them after death, how do they work inside of man, and can we see or touch them???

Or, are they similar to the electric current of our sockets, where we can only see the effect the moment we turn on the interrupter of something which is plugged into the power supply system?

What about our terrestrial atmosphere, does Man have anything similar?

Many people talk about the aura inside and around Man, but how can we explore the proprieties of this supposed aura, and how and through what agent are they generated?

What is its function in Man, and is there a possible interaction with other people because of the same aura?

If so, in what way?

Does the aura by chance possess the same alleged proprieties as the hypothetic dark matter in the universe, and is there a continuous interaction between the aura and this dark matter, as well?

However, as most of us know through medicine, every human being has the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous system…so, considering these nervous systems, how could we create with them an equation in relation to the universe, or is this impossible?

So, do we need the quantum physics to know ourselves, or are there alternative research methods to improve our true self-knowledge?

Doesn’t our reason tell us that it is better starting with the known Man and then penetrating into the unknown realm of Man, and maybe even the universe would explain it to us through a hypothesis, considering all its functions when we talk about the micro-cosmos and the macro-cosmos?

[spiritismo-italiano]

ABOUT KNOWLEDGE AND SMART-ASSES…!

By Wieslster Witold

Translated by Brunhilde Miriam Bertotto

And other statements like “he thinks he knows everything”…

Why do we classify some people as smart-asses?

Does this happen in order to hide our own shortcomings?

Does this happen in order to justify us for not making any effort?

Does this happen because we don’t want to tuck up our sleeves and investigate?

However, some statement tells us that everything is inside of us and in our universe!

But where inside of us resides this marvelous knowledge?

Where and how can we retrieve this alleged knowledge?

Does it work like this: we do a headstand and “quickly toss it out”?

But, how do we acquire our knowledge?

Is it acquired through the alleged Akasha principle?

What exactly is this alleged Akasha principle so often mentioned in esoteric circles?

Can we see or touch this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the proprieties of this alleged Akasha principle?

How do we contact this alleged Akasha principle?

What are the requirements a person should have to contact this Akasha principle?

How and in what way can we distinguish whether the received information derives from the alleged Akasha principle or whether we’ll find the cause of this information inside of us?

Does not our consciousness filter everything?

And, above all – what is our consciousness like and how does it work?

Is it possible that our subconsciousness is involved, too?

What is our subconsciousness and what are its tasks inside a human being?

How does our subconsciousness work?

Can the universe be linked to our spirit/our soul or is it already continuously connected to our spirit/our soul?

Who knows which is the driving force in man, our spirit or our soul?

By the way, who knows whether there is a difference between spirit and soul, and if so what difference is it?

How are spirit and/or soul linked to the body?

What are the proprieties of the alleged spirit/the soul, or are they both the same, are they identical?

Do we know it better?

Isn’t it true that nobody can take our personal knowledge and experiences away from us?

So, why do we refuse to reflect on the experiences of others, why don’t we question them, why don’t we dig deeper in order to find out whether we have understood everything correctly and to learn how the other person had come to his/her knowledge?

Wouldn’t it be better for our personal maturation process to exchange ideas, opinions or new concepts about these topics in order to enrich our own knowledge?

Wouldn’t this be better than principally refuting everything different or strange only because we do not immediately understand it, or because the person in front of us seems weird and not trustworthy because he/she maybe does not harmonize with the information oscillating on our hard disk?

Wouldn’t these new ideas and viewpoints create new neuronal connections, and won’t they broaden our horizons of perception?

How could someone pretend to walk on the path of self-knowledge when he, at the same time, limits himself through his actions and does not tolerate new experiences because of his habitual behaviors?

As we can see, there have been given many clear statements about personal viewpoints, opinions, and convictions, but…does this correspond to a superior truth or do other people and books in most cases only assume this form of truth?

Or, has all this been our own idea?

Fortunately, on our planet there live abundantly different people, everyone has his/her personal experiences, knowledge and consciousness; it would otherwise be quite tiresome for us if we all had taken the same road!

What do we conclude from this?

Right, exchanging our experiences makes us all learn a lot from each other!

However, what are the requirements needed to do so?

What is it that hinders us to understand and accept other opinions?

Are these possibly our mental blocks, our traumata or our pride?

What is the opposite of pride?

What happens to us when we principally refuse other opinions and orientations?

Do we guess and believe to know it better, even without having made any detailed research in this or that field?

Or, do we have failed in clearing our understanding of dialogue and monologue?

Could it matter whether we have an open or a closed mind?

What exactly is it and how does it work?

What are the scientific research methods we could use to gain knowledge through experiences made on ourselves?

As usually done in the fields of research, shouldn’t we beforehand create a hypothesis of the object of studies?

And discuss the procedure only afterwards, and maybe procure some information on the object of research or create the necessary laboratory conditions?

How can we create a cause in the laboratory and then, hopefully, assist to its effects?

Is it possible to deduce the cause while assisting only to the effect?

There is, of course, a lot of information in the Worldwide Web; information on electricity, electromagnetism, and - let’s just think of the earth’s electromagnetic field in our solar system, and the electromagnetic sun storms which allegedly influence our earth, as well. Furthermore, there are the statements and regularities of quantum physics, where they even speak of dark matter, which supposedly connects everything in the universe, we included.

So, let’s suppose we are all connected, but how?

Is it necessary to explore the universe in order to understand all this or are there other possibilities?

Just to make a hypothesis, is not Man a universe of his own within the same universe?

It has been proved that there are electromagnetic oscillations inside of Man, but where do they come from, and what happens to them after death, how do they work inside of man, and can we see or touch them???

Or, are they similar to the electric current of our sockets, where we can only see the effect the moment we turn on the interrupter of something which is plugged into the power supply system?

What about our terrestrial atmosphere, does Man have anything similar?

Many people talk about the aura inside and around Man, but how can we explore the proprieties of this supposed aura, and how and through what agent are they generated?

What is its function in Man, and is there a possible interaction with other people because of the same aura?

If so, in what way?

Does the aura by chance possess the same alleged proprieties as the hypothetic dark matter in the universe, and is there a continuous interaction between the aura and this dark matter, as well?

However, as most of us know through medicine, every human being has the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous system…so, considering these nervous systems, how could we create with them an equation in relation to the universe, or is this impossible?

So, do we need the quantum physics to know ourselves, or are there alternative research methods to improve our true self-knowledge?

Doesn’t our reason tell us that it is better starting with the known Man and then penetrating into the unknown realm of Man, and maybe even the universe would explain it to us through a hypothesis, considering all its functions when we talk about the micro-cosmos and the macro-cosmos?