This needs to be a pinned post in at least five of the communities I subscribe to.

It pisses me off so much when I go to the art museum and see a cool piece that the artist RUINED by putting an advertisement in the bottom corner.

And then the museum has the audacity to put another plaque with an advertisement next to it, too! The nerve on these people.

Is that the reason people crop out artists?

Attributing the image for this post was a nice touch

I'm sorry, the best I can do is write "credit to the artist" because I'm too lazy to look up who did it. Take it or leave it, bucko
/s

We need to normalize shaming people for casually sharing stolen art. This includes people sharing things they "made" with AI.

I think of it this way, if I publish a work of art I make, if you share it in a way I did not want but still link back to me as the artist, it is going to be really hard for me to be upset with you because even if you stole the art from me you have brought my art to more people's attention so the impact cannot be seen as purely bad.

Which doesn't make it right, I am not advocating for stealing art from artists, I am trying to emphasize that if your attentions are good, when in doubt link to the artist. I mean... why not?

edit also keep in mind that most actually decent ways of identifying how relevant a website is from the perspective of a search engine is how many unique places that are linked to from that website that people also find useful. I think this is a useful rough measurement of relevance and thus in a structural sense the more you link to genuinely relevant and interesting things, the more connected the entire community becomes in a generative way.

Take for example Metafilter, one of the ways you can quantify that Metafilter is an interesting and unique website to read is the degree of interesting and unique links that are placed into context in interesting ways there.

Is beep banned from lemmy world yet?