141–150 of 215 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A gift in the form of an insult. There are more productive ways to deal with wealth inequality.
Maybe you get your feelings of rage and envy get in the way of clear thinking. In my experience, that doesn't serve one well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's one of those things where someone mixed up the centuries. The page states "XVIIe siècle" (17th century), if someone somewhere mixed up "16th century" (which is correct) with "the 1600s", that could explain the error. Personally I'm really not a fan of using the "century" notation, and in my native language it's never used.
> and in my native language it's never used. So how do you handle fuzzy dates? What language is it, if I may ask?
Just for the record, I'm not saying this is a feature of Swedish specifically. I'm sure there are other languages that do the same.
The resolution of (some) images is vary disappointing, especially the downloads versions which seem even worse... https://collections.louvre.fr/en/ark:/53355/cl020579933 MOMA on the other hand has very high quality imagery of Durer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buying NFTs is the public equivalent of wiping your -ss with money. Not sure how to feel morally neutral about it.
How many poor people were harmed because of NFTs? In fact, it seemed to transfer a great deal of wealth to an artist who was formerly of modest means.
Recently the Amsterdam Rijks Museum made their collection available via API, which I used to create website which will show you a random artwork on each button press: https://randomrijks.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Stolen Dubious opinion >Rightful owners All long dead
If property can be rightfully inherited, either the descendants of whatever Pharaoh/other ancient Egyptian or the successor state of ancient Egypt are the rightful owners of what was taken from them. If your property may end up in a foreign museum millennia after you die, why even bother working?
First of all "Rightful inheritance" is a matter of human law not natural law. Whatever state or laws existed surrounding inheritance clearly do not exist anymore for artifacts more than a few hundred years old. It is absurd to say property rights of states existing thousands of years ago apply today. You won't find any courts arguing that. Absurd.
Second, descendants of millennia old property owners are both impossible, and too easy to find. Because of the way human genetics works you yourself may be a descendant. I'm a descendant of 13th century nobility, does that mean I and the millions of others with this ancestry inherit their various artifacts such as a cup or textile? Absurd.
>If your property may end up in a foreign museum millennia after you die, why even bother working?
I don't know. You'd have to decide that for yourself. To me the question is absurd. When I die I may will what is left of my estate, but I don't absurdly believe that thousands of years later my will be respected. Totally ridiculous.
These artifacts belong to the world. Any attempts by states to force other states or organizations to "return stolen items" is a mealy mouthed way of saying they want the value they perceive they have lost. This is absurd greed. Just like conquering land, the losers have no right to their lost land. That is never the case. And you will never see these same states trying to return the land they have "stolen" to the descendants thousands of years later, now spread myriad around the world, because it's fucking absurd.
When people die and a lot of time passes things become just things. Some novel state that has no true connection to, and in fact had no knowledge of, some past state has no right to property of millennia-dead people of that state. It's ridiculous.
If this was about doing the right thing then one would recognize that these are artifacts of our shared human heritage, and as such they should be kept in trust for the benefit for all humanity unbound to any particular regime cultural or legal. Of course it isn't about doing the right thing it's about stupid politics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many poor people were harmed because of NFTs? In fact, it seemed to transfer a great deal of wealth to an artist who was formerly of modest means.
Seems mostly to transfer wealth to already famous or rich people. The rich buying stuff from each other. Perhaps even laundering money as they do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buying NFTs is the public equivalent of wiping your -ss with money. Not sure how to feel morally neutral about it.
How many poor people were harmed because of NFTs? In fact, it seemed to transfer a great deal of wealth to an artist who was formerly of modest means.
Why don't these photos to have color calibration targets? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/163309-REG/Kodak_1907... And maybe some meta data about the camera and settings. I don't recall any online collections using targets. Surely these curation and archivist domain experts record this stuff. I've casually asked a few times, but no leads. -- My partner likes to create master copies. Portrait, still life. I've…
Has anyone ever raised copyright concerns?
I know this potentially sounds ungrateful, but it’s a shame they didn’t follow the example of Paris Musées and place their collection under CC0. [1] As it is it’s really useful for attribution and generalised research, but it doesn’t give you many options for reuse. [1] https://creativecommons.org/2020/01/10/paris-musees-releases...
The works themselves are all in the public domain, apart perhaps from rare exceptions. So my understanding is that it is the photographs of those works that are copyrighted. In my view it goes against the spirit of public domain to use this in order to restrict the use of the collections put online.
However, I think the laws for this vary quite a bit across countries, and in many countries the photograph is considered a new copyright work. In general it's pretty frustrating how many legal barriers there are to accessing and reusing old works of art. Thankfully a growing number of museums have made things easy with clear copyright releases (Rijksmuseum, Paris Musées, the MET), but others seem more interested in preserving their ability to sell prints.