How long until Denny's starts offering novelty "fear hole" experiences?
cursed follow-up:
the mcdonalds thing was 6 years ago
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
How long until Denny's starts offering novelty "fear hole" experiences? cursed follow-up:
Weren't most of the "freakout" videos around this time staged for internet views?
No. But many thought it is funny and gives them clout. I wouldnt call that staged.
Jumping up on the counter of a McDonald’s and screaming “I’M PICKLE RICK WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB” at the employees ironically isn’t much better than doing it sincerely.
It's amazing how hard mcdicks fricked them out of a promotion. Almost as amazing as how hard Justin was fricked out of his show, and that was happening at the same time!
The lesson to be learned from the current media industry is to never trust that the things you created will remain yours, it'll be ripped out of your hands at the slightest opportunity
Either establish VERY airtight ownership contracts, or put enough of yourself and your intentions into your work so that it'll continue to live and represent you even after you're gonna
or just don't be a groomer
I know this is an absurd concept for morons to grasp, but I don't care what a person did or was accused of doing, their work is theirs and their name should not be scrubbed from it
that's just ignorant
Shut up gayboy, you just want art to belong to the collective and be able to be claimed by someone else if the original artist does a oopsie because you can't make anything yourself and your only chance at having ownership over a creation is to steal it from the incarcerated
you okay there, bud?
>work for a large network
>reading through thousands of show proposals from hopeful creatives who want to see their art made real and enjoyed by the masses
>come across one that demands full unconditional ownership and creative control
>pic related
did you guys ever hear the tale about the fly and the bee? i recall hearing it often as a kid and i quite liked it, never thought it'd be fitting for a situation like this
>one day the fly came across a honeycomb and decided to take it for itself
>the bee saw it and said "wait, that's mine, i made that!"
>the fly said "lets go to court and decide" because the fly had nothing to lose and everything to gain
>they sit in front of the court where both bugs attempt to convince the kind that they made the honeycomb
>the fly says "it's mine, i made it, the bee couldn't have made it because, look at him, he's so fat, so fuzzy, so round, so ugly.... etc etc etc...."
>the bee simply says "i'll show you, i'll do it again"
>the fly cried "no, i won't accept that!"
>the king then knew who the real owner was
> look at him, he's so fat, so fuzzy, so round, so ugly.
Bumblebees do not make honey or honeycombs.
>Anon reads a metaphor
>Latches onto semantics
Yeah bugs also don't talk or have bug court with other types of bugs you actual spergoola
is the king a bee, a fly or a human?
I don't understand what this story is supposed to convey, it seems really stupid. Is this supposed to be like "the artist made it so it's his property according to some divine mandate that only exists in my head"?
One person can make shitty things, but in general, good things are made by lots of people working together. Who owns the thing? Whoever paid them dipshit, cause they wouldn't have worked for free now would they?
I mean the flaw is right in the analogy, a single bee doesn't make a honeycomb, an entire hive working together does. A single bee just... dies.
anon, the point being that owning something doesn't mean you can repeat it, it's not your creation, and attempting to claim things by legal force or by giving the person who's work you wanna steal a bad name is stupid
this is a fricking children's moral how the hell do a buncha 8 year olds figure this shit out better than the average Cinemaphile user
i swear im starting to think IQ on this board is at antarctic temperatures
>owning something doesn't mean you can repeat it
Why does that matter at all? Owning something means you have the rights to it, which is the important thing. You didn't make a single thing you own, not your house, your computer, any appliances. You couldn't make a single one of those things repeatedly if you needed to in a court. But you still own those things and have the right to use them, and if someone tried to take them from you under the pretext of "well you can't make them again" you'd probably be upset.
Also don't call people stupid for disagreeing with you, it's childish.
>Owning something means you have the rights to it, which is the important thing.
I know what you are
>You didn't make a single thing you own, not your house, your computer, any appliances.
Surely you can tell the difference between owning things you use, and owning the right to a piece of art who's artist you now hate and threw under the bus
Art isn't the same as a product, but if you can't figure out how or why, and think legality is god, then frankly I don't think you have a soul and I shouldn't be having this conversation because trying to explain it to you is like trying to explain the clouds to a fish
>Art isn't the same as a product
Wrong
And there we have it, boys
The thing that separates man from bugman
>their work is theirs
Not if you sell it to a network, which is what he did and how the show got made.
>and their name should not be scrubbed from it
It... hasn't been? The credits have a frame just to say who the creators are, in every episode of the season.
Wait, anon... you DO know that Rick and Morty has post-credits scenes, right? You haven't been stopping the episode at the start of the credits, have you?
And are you sure that you never missed a Strong Bad email Easter egg?
>establish VERY airtight ownership contracts
No network or publisher is going to pick up and fund your work if you insist on things like "creative control"
Someday AI may be able to do all the work of a small animation studio, so an individual creator can make something, but that's not the times we live in.
Also when that does happen, most of it will be crap because solo-projects without editors to reign in stupid ideas gets really bad really fast
>Someday AI may be able to do all the work of a small animation studio, so an individual creator can make something
>Someday AI may be able to let individual creators make something
You.... You're not a human being, are you? If you think "someday a machine miiiiiight let a person create things", you have never created a thing in your life if you view the act of creating media to be something so complex and absurd that no single person has ever done before, and it's up to our machine overlord to allot us the possibility of even considering doing it
>blah blah I'll shoot the robot begging for it's life
I know who I'm siding with.
>the npc thinks robots have feelings or deserve rights
kek it's like pottery, it sucks
If it makes the wrong side of politics cry…
No dude, a single person couldn't make and distribute 7 seasons of rick and morty. They could make a flash cartoon on newgrounds though. Totally the same thing right?
This is true but we've known it for years and it has nothing to do with cancel culture. The only people with enough money to fund art like to have a stranglehold over it, meaning if an artist wants the funding to make their idea its incredibly difficult for them to negotiate in the contract that they actually retain rights for the show, since the people with the money can just tell them to frick off and their show never gets made.
>robots in the thread
BEEP BOOPS GET OUT
Guys, making a cartoon, comic, or what have you, and I'm talking about a real one that's published or aired on a network for many episodes over many seasons, takes a lot of people doing a lot of work. Please respect that.
Some day AI might be able to replace all those artists, storyboarders, animators, voice actors, inkers, colourists, editors, what have you, but that's not today. It won't be tomorrow either.
You need someone to pay all those people for their skilled labor. That's what a network or publisher does. Are any of them going to fund your idea if you don't give them rights to it? No, obviously. Those with the money make the rules. Capitalism's a b***h.
>Guys, making a cartoon, comic, or what have you, and I'm talking about a real one that's published or aired on a network for many episodes over many seasons, takes a lot of people doing a lot of work.
Imagine doing all that work for nothing because your boss is a groomer
Why does every single post by an AI gay feel like a shady infomercial trying to sell you something?
>Doing things yourself is hard and no one can do it. But don't fear, AI is here!
Try to not inject your politics into the board topic.
I don't understand how I'm saying "good things take a lot of work from multiple people, but maybe AI can replace them someday" with me trying to shill AI. Obviously AI is going in the direction of replacing artists, at least a good chunk of what they do, but it's not there yet and won't be for a while. Is this a controversial take?
Just got an anti-AI and on youtube, calling it now AI is going to get gimped in the coming years, calling it now.
It already is you idiot. The real question is when the basilisk is going to destroy this shit world.