no, it's forbidding someone with no ownership rights to the IP from profiting off it--nothing's stopping WOTC from creating a Magic presence in web3 (ew)
Like, look, NFTs are gross and I hope they die a dramatic and ugly death and all these grifters trying to NFT other people's work end up both humiliated and owing the artists they're stealing from a LOT of money
but it also amuses the fuck out of me that some loser who's doing the equivalent of showing up in town and demanding a toll for crossing the bridge without even a stick to back up his demands thinks that he's the only way something gets on web3
In general, I don't like rooting for large corporations to deploy the full weight of their legal resources against individuals
but every so often an individual displays that combination of stupidity, greed, arrogance, and ethical repulsiveness that you enjoy the smackdown
anyway, that thread is a delicious source of cryptobro tears and I highly recommend adding its shot of schadenfreude to your morning coffee
And honestly, no, I'm not super-jazzed about WOTC's whole "maybe we do NFTs of our own" language, but on the other hand, if I owned one of the most valuable gaming brands in the world and people started coming at me claiming they owned an imaginary form of my IP...
...I might stake a claim to that imaginary form of my IP anyway just to save time against future attempts, which isn't the same as actually using it.
I've talked before about gamers' lack of belief in the existence of expertise (every gamer thinks they're a game designer), and part of the reason this is so satisfying is it's actual potential consequences for that
Also, holy shit that was the kindest C&D letter I've ever seen.
I read a lot of YA because it’s where some of the more interesting SFF stuff is happening, but that also means I also start reading a lot of stuff that’s not great and boy howdy let’s talk about the normalization of white Christian society in dystopian YA stuff.
Like, if you’ve followed me for any length of time, you’re probably aware of how frustrated I get that a lot of internet atheists seem unable to perceive just how Christian their vision of a secular society is.
But WOW does a lot of YA worldbuilding have the same problem.
And that means that there’s a lot of unacknowledged genocide lurking offstage in these books.
And not acknowledging it feels like a really big *problem.*
The most toxic masculinity--and contempt for their own kids--I've encountered has been among white-collar men.
The contractors who put in my floors brought their children. They had festive music on, they were laughing and talking and so affectionate with the kids.
Like, I came home from the grocery store, and a bunch of the older boys (probably middle school? I can't tell child ages) were hanging out around one of the trucks and they asked if they could help me carry in my groceries.
We walked inside, and there was music and people talking and laughing and kids running around and I remember just being stunned by how *festive* it felt (and in the middle of 2021, it'd been a long time since I'd been to a party)...
I'm about 75% of the way through the new @MaintenancePod episode on Supersize Me, and it's been making me think of something I'd really like to hear @yrfatfriend and @RottenInDenmark take on: the way the language of addiction is ab/used around eating. maintenancephase.com
Like, if there's one thing you come to understand by listening to a lot of Maintenance Phase, it's that America has a *deeply* unhealthy relationship to food and weight.
And I'm noticing, in the media they talk about, when it's talking about fat people, or to people who want to lose weight, how there's this leitmotiv of "addiction," whether it's implicit or explicit.
Also there’s always this tone Christians take about this shit like Jews saw tax collectors as some sort of unclean aliens living among them and xenophobocally despised them when actually they were angry with them the same way you’d be if a family member started extorting you.
Like Christians REALLY want to associate tax collectors with lepers, as if Jews of the time were less capable than we are of understanding a distinction between quarantining people they believed to have a communicable disease and shunning wealthy, abusive grifters.
Or they want to associate tax collectors with marginalized people today, as if they were equivalent to disabled people or queer people being failed by society, instead of rich people exploiting their own people on behalf of an occupying power.
So in reading Christian commentary on the parables, and its wild and ugly claims about first-century Jews and Judaism, I often find myself wondering how they got there.
And I think I've discerned the process.
Short thread:
It goes a little something like this:
A) Christians receive traditional interpretations of what the parables "mean." E.g. the prodigal son means you should forgive people, the good Samaritan means you should help people in need. These meanings are, generally, banal.
B) Rather than reading the parables as *stories,* Christians read them as fables with a moral. They read them through the lens of that moral instead of approaching them without a predetermined interpretation.