Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 352 posts

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#151

Post by madeofpalk »

mindcandy wrote: post #74

Everyone is crying Corporate Greed in here. And, I can understand why. But, here’s another perspective based on listening to David Holz answer all kinds of questions from random users for four hours a week for over a year during Midjourney’s “Office Hours”. AFAICT, Midjourney has no shareholders and David Holz is the farthest thing from a slick CEO. He’s a big dreamer hippie dork. He made all the money he cares to ha…

> Whenever politics or other controversial topics come up, the MJ teams tries to stay out of it

> [...]

> So, [ridiculing] Xi is blocked

These two points are not congruent.

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#153

Post by 411111111111111 »

Teever wrote: post #138
WiSaGaN wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, doesn't the concept of a free society apply to private corporations as well? The government is not restricting you; the private company is exercising its right to run its business according to its own free will. The principle of a free society suggests that "if you don't like the company's policy, find another one or create your own." Is that wrong?

> the private company is exercising its right to run its business according to its own free will. Let's run with that. Should a company be allowed to own slaves? Should a company be allowed to do business with a company that owns slaves?

For the record: pretty much all clothing is still created with effectively slave labour.

Either in the harvesting of the cotton, refinement to cloth, sewing to clothing or finally when dyeing.

And the second example: apple still has an assembly manned by Uruguay internment slaves and pretty much everyone here fawns over it every chance they get.

So from the perspective of HN both of these are seemingly acceptable

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#154

Post by madeofpalk »

secondcoming wrote: post #148
mindcandy wrote: post #74

Everyone is crying Corporate Greed in here. And, I can understand why. But, here’s another perspective based on listening to David Holz answer all kinds of questions from random users for four hours a week for over a year during Midjourney’s “Office Hours”. AFAICT, Midjourney has no shareholders and David Holz is the farthest thing from a slick CEO. He’s a big dreamer hippie dork. He made all the money he cares to ha…

It really perplexes me that there isn't any Internet Outrage about fetishisation of young Japanese girls; cartoons or otherwise. As far as I can see it's the one area of DEI that gets a free pass. It's really creepy.

what does anime waitfus have to do with DEI?

There's no DEI initiative to help the disadvantaged weeaboos

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#156

Post by madeofpalk »

WiSaGaN wrote: post #91
andrewstuart wrote: post #47

>> “the ability for people in China to use this tech is more important than your ability to generate satire.” How about "the ability for people to be free and have free systems and society is more important than the money we hope to get from doing business in China". But here we are in Silicon Valley where business and money rise above all else including national sovereignty.

I mean, doesn't the concept of a free society apply to private corporations as well? The government is not restricting you; the private company is exercising its right to run its business according to its own free will. The principle of a free society suggests that "if you don't like the company's policy, find another one or create your own." Is that wrong?

No, that is not wrong. Nor is it wrong to dislike what a company does and try to get them to change.

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#157

Post by ElFitz »

vidarh wrote: post #68
selcuka wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are not people. The CEO might have principles, but he cannot apply his own principles to the company. The only principle for a company is to maximise profit within the legal restrictions.

While this may be true in a general sense in that most companies have bylaws that does not set out another purpose, and that in theory shareholders could go after a board, and so indirectly a CEO, that does not seek to maximise profit, this is overly simplistic. The CEO is beholden to the directions of the board. The board has wide latitude to act within the rather wide remit of acting within the best interests of th…

What board? Midjourney has no investors. No shareholders.

He’s only beholden to himself. And proud of it.

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#158

Post by jpgvm »

fsloth wrote: post #137
jpgvm wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar would also be illegal in Thailand under Lèse-majesté. Political satire of the old King in particular would be unwelcoming to many Thais which held him in an esteem above such things. Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it wouldn't also be culturally unacceptable and alienating.

The difference between the king of Thailand and Xi Jinping is that the former is basically a cultural institution, while the latter is a political figure who uses repression and censorship to consolidate power. Xi's power grab is not part of some Chinese cherished cultural tradition - it's just a power grab, and probably viewed as such even within the party.

I'm aware of the differences. I just wanted to provide an example of censorship that is more aligned with cultural values to provide a counter-example to the thread that violating such laws can never be exclusionary.

There are are similar laws that involve depictions of The Buddha, monks etc here that would fall into the same category. I imagine this is less contentious for Western observers because religion is often a protected class in Western nations too.

The idea of the head of state being immune to criticism however hits a political sore spot however and triggers these sorts of standoff views.

I just feel this sort of nuance is lost on primarily American audiences. The world isn't homogenous and at least here in Thailand values are significantly different for better or worse.

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#159

Post by say_it_as_it_is »

This was a sensible response. China, unlike the U.S, will focus its resources on destroying Midjourney and the lives of people running it. Don't think for a moment that the U.S. government will protect your business, you or your family. Pick your battles wisely and decide whether freedom of speech involving Winnie the Xi Jinping are worth protecting.

Re: Midjourney CEO Silencing Satire About Xi Jinping

#160

Post by krapp »

Teever wrote: post #138
WiSaGaN wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, doesn't the concept of a free society apply to private corporations as well? The government is not restricting you; the private company is exercising its right to run its business according to its own free will. The principle of a free society suggests that "if you don't like the company's policy, find another one or create your own." Is that wrong?

> the private company is exercising its right to run its business according to its own free will. Let's run with that. Should a company be allowed to own slaves? Should a company be allowed to do business with a company that owns slaves?

>Should a company be allowed to own slaves?

No, because slavery is illegal.

>Should a company be allowed to do business with a company that owns slaves?

They do, all the time. Manufacturing, mining (particularly of the rare earth metals that go into electronics) and agriculture all depend on slave labor.

Post reply on HN