I like that the image already contains the credit twice (props for those crops, whoever did it), but you put it into your comment a third time to be sure. Good bird!
when ripping comics off the internet, it’s important to give credit where its due. I probably should have credited the person I ripped it from, and they probably should have redited whoever they ripped it from, who ripped it from Safely Endangered…
you know, recognize all the effort everyone put in.
Given that all those rips didn’t add anything to the original work, I’d argue they don’t strictly require credit. They’re not really derivative works, but rather reproductions of the original.
I can see the logic behind crediting “this is where I got it from” as proximate source in addition to naming the ultimate source. In academic contexts, it’s certainly important to specify where you quoted someone from to make your sources transparent in addition to naming the original source. This isn’t an academic context, however, so I wouldn’t consider it warranted.
I don’t really disagree, I’m not even sure where it came from, honestly. The first search result from whatever term I used? (“comic Kirby eating doctor”?) mostly being somewhat facetious in the chain of shameless ripping.
I have this nasty habit of taking jokes - even ones I recognise as such - and starting a serious line of thought from that. I know you’re joking because that’s an excessive amount of effort for sharing a joke, but in the process of evaluating that, my brain has latched on to the question of “Could that be serious? How would that play out?”, started analysing and I don’t know how to make it stop doing that.
I once read about a theory that Kirby was the opposite of DarkMatter. DarkMatter being pure evil and Kirby being pure kindness.
Also, Kirby survived several exploding planets and destroyed a Man-Made god the size of a Star… okay now that I thought about that, Kirby’s pretty dope.
supposedly there’s some super being that absorbs emotions, and when it absorbs extremely strong emotions it generates a new being to contain those emotions. dark matter was the result of it absorbing hate, while kirby was the result of it absorbing love.
Isn’t kirby an amoeba according to matpat?
I dunno.
but this comic makes me laugh:
(safely endangered.)
I like that the image already contains the credit twice (props for those crops, whoever did it), but you put it into your comment a third time to be sure. Good bird!
when ripping comics off the internet, it’s important to give credit where its due. I probably should have credited the person I ripped it from, and they probably should have redited whoever they ripped it from, who ripped it from Safely Endangered…
you know, recognize all the effort everyone put in.
Given that all those rips didn’t add anything to the original work, I’d argue they don’t strictly require credit. They’re not really derivative works, but rather reproductions of the original.
I can see the logic behind crediting “this is where I got it from” as proximate source in addition to naming the ultimate source. In academic contexts, it’s certainly important to specify where you quoted someone from to make your sources transparent in addition to naming the original source. This isn’t an academic context, however, so I wouldn’t consider it warranted.
It’s an interesting consideration, to be sure.
I don’t really disagree, I’m not even sure where it came from, honestly. The first search result from whatever term I used? (“comic Kirby eating doctor”?) mostly being somewhat facetious in the chain of shameless ripping.
I have this nasty habit of taking jokes - even ones I recognise as such - and starting a serious line of thought from that. I know you’re joking because that’s an excessive amount of effort for sharing a joke, but in the process of evaluating that, my brain has latched on to the question of “Could that be serious? How would that play out?”, started analysing and I don’t know how to make it stop doing that.
it’s like patents and “prior work”. lol. sometimes it gets ridiculous.
I once read about a theory that Kirby was the opposite of DarkMatter. DarkMatter being pure evil and Kirby being pure kindness.
Also, Kirby survived several exploding planets and destroyed a Man-Made god the size of a Star… okay now that I thought about that, Kirby’s pretty dope.
Kirby is like an eldritch god, but kawaii.
Full circle to cephalopod
supposedly there’s some super being that absorbs emotions, and when it absorbs extremely strong emotions it generates a new being to contain those emotions. dark matter was the result of it absorbing hate, while kirby was the result of it absorbing love.