141–150 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't let your distaste of crypto ruin a cool project otherwise
I’m sure it would be trivial to replicate this project without the weird world-burning money grab purpose. I’m perfectly happy to not support or share crypto cash grab schemes dressed up as wholesome little projects.
Chickens are beautiful creatures worthy of at the least the respect we give to household pets. The unimaginable horror we put billions of them through on an ongoing basis, while dissonantly admiring their charm and brilliance, is a sobering realization.
indeed, the line between "pet" and "food" is disturbing in both where it's drawn, and it's fundamental relativism.
Think more about cows. Nice creatures. Live in the fields under the sun and that isn't horrific. We eat them. Maybe you had a pet cow? Ok that's fine. There's your pet/food line issue. Most omnivorous humans believe it is possible to treat them with respect in their lives and eat them. Others disagree, of course they do. That's also fine.
As a civilization, we don't treat chickens anything like that. We have factory farms that are utterly horrific, stomach-turning and detrimental to global health and we pretend we kind of pretend don't know that and don't talk about it much.
You don't have to be a vegetarian or keep chickens as pets or even particularly like chickens much (and I don't) to object to those horrors. Factory farms days are numbered. They are beyond what the consumers of factory farms can stomach. They are beyond what we should tolerate in their abuse of the commons of having effective antibiotics. They are nothing like what we think of as farms which are usually some approximation of the family farm. It is perfectly reasonable and defensible to be very proudly meat-eating and want effective reform here. In my experience most do lean that way when they find out what goes on in a shed full of caged chickens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unusual points of view. High, low, inside a pipe, from a tree, under water, where people don't usually go / aren't allowed / can't access, etc. Keep in mind that the unusual can become commonplace if overused. Selfie sticks were initially a novel PoV. They became cliche in about a week.
If your pictures aren't interesting enough, you're not close enough
Earlier quoted context omitted.
indeed, the line between "pet" and "food" is disturbing in both where it's drawn, and it's fundamental relativism.
I disagree. Chicken have been seen as food for the majority of our existence on this planet, not pets. That now we see them as pet as well talks about the complexity and capacity for contradiction and paradoxes of our culture and our minds. I accept that biologically I thrive on chicken meat yet I am intellectually capable of thinking chicken are very lovely animals. Humans are walking contradictions. As much as many…
This may not be correct: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jun/06/chickens-wer...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also don't own the copyright for pictures randomly generated by computers, presumably this applies to chicken randomization as well.
-randomly You don’t own the copyright for any picture generated by a computer, whether random or intentional
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m sure it would be trivial to replicate this project without the weird world-burning money grab purpose. I’m perfectly happy to not support or share crypto cash grab schemes dressed up as wholesome little projects.
It's basically just a URL right, blame the PnD groups not the 'tech' imo
If anything, the whole “our stack is so minimal!” angle serves as a signal to crypto dorks that minting NFTs for profit is an accessible possibility with minimal necessary buy-in.
This isn’t just a website with pictures of chickens. It is a for-profit advertisement for crypto with pictures of chickens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The chickens are using an input device (the motion sensor) to invoke a computer function [...] No, per the description and your legal context, the chickens are not taking the pictures.
You also don't own the copyright for pictures randomly generated by computers, presumably this applies to chicken randomization as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also don't own the copyright for pictures randomly generated by computers, presumably this applies to chicken randomization as well.
-randomly You don’t own the copyright for any picture generated by a computer, whether random or intentional
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. Chicken have been seen as food for the majority of our existence on this planet, not pets. That now we see them as pet as well talks about the complexity and capacity for contradiction and paradoxes of our culture and our minds. I accept that biologically I thrive on chicken meat yet I am intellectually capable of thinking chicken are very lovely animals. Humans are walking contradictions. As much as many…
> Chicken have been seen as food for the majority of our existence on this planet This may not be correct: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jun/06/chickens-wer...
We consider doves to be an "elegant" bird, all white, used in religious imagery and magicians' tricks, and so on, while we consider pigeons to be a "dirty" bird, mostly known for scavenging food in cities, even though they're basically the same type of bird. People chase them around for fun.
But if someone had only ever seen white doves and suddenly saw a much more colorful version of the bird that we call pigeons, they'd probably consider it to be the more fanciful, impressive-looking bird.