Watching the drama around kagi unfold and it has me wondering how much you take into consideration a creator’s view on things like homophobia, sexism, racism, etc. when deciding to use a product. I think most of us have a bar somewhere (I would imagine very few on this website would ever consider registering on an altright platform), so where is that bar for you? What about art? Have you boycotted JKR or dropped your opinion about Picasso because they’re transphobic and misogynistic respectively? Is it about the general vibe of a product or piece of media, or are you more discerning? What goes into this decision and why?

  • Feydaikin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It depends. People are allowed to have their own opinions as far as I’m concerned.

    If their products are good, I see no reason why I shouldn’t use them. Even if I don’t agree with said opinion.

    However, if they are actively making the world a shittier place for others, then I start to have a problem with them.

    Like JKR not being pro-trans is just her opinion. And as far as I know, she hasn’t gone on a crusade against anyone yet.

    But Blizzard encouraging the sexual harrasment of it’s female employees is a totally different beast. And I didnt feel right keeping supporting them.

    But it’s a line everyone has to figure out for themselves.

    • adderaline
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 year ago

      Like JKR not being pro-trans is just her opinion. And as far as I know, she hasn’t gone on a crusade against anyone yet.

      using a large public platform to disseminate the same kinds of anti-trans arguments currently being used by bigots to draft legislation putting trans people at risk is not just an opinion. like, it isn’t a crusade, but when there is a crusade going on and you’re saying the same thing the crusaders are saying, its not a good look.

      • Feydaikin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        I’m not really up to date on JKR to be honest. It was mostly an example of someone who was asked her opinion, gave it and it pissed people off enough for it to become an issue.

        There’s a reason we shouldn’t look to celebrities for answers or anything other than the entertainment they supply.

    • Mateo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      I get that it’s just an example and you weren’t up to date with her, but jkr is probably the worst example of someone who isn’t actively making the world a shittier place lmao.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    Its tricky, because how much do I really know about people’s views who I’ve never met? Especially more famous people who might just be crafting a public image. They might be hiding aspects of thier views that are bad publicity, or just being controversial to drum up attention.

  • Melllvar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    281 year ago

    I refuse to use the Brave browser, and I was prepared to abandon Firefox, over then-CEO Brendan Eich’s $1000 donation in support of California’s proposition 8 (banning same-sex marriage). I will never forgive the supporters of that proposition. I will not knowingly support their businesses.

    I’ve lost all respect for Scott Adams (of the Dilbert comic strip) and Kelsey Grammar (Frasier actor). Their continued support for Donald Trump is damning.

  • Admiral Patrick
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Quite a bit as I’ve always found it difficult to separate the artist from the art.

    I’ve never read any of HP (it was “witchcraft” and “of the devil” when I was growing up in the bible belt lol), but all the unenlightened opinions from JKR really don’t inspire me to give her any of my money, so I doubt I’ll be reading it just to see what all the fuss was about.

    Even shows/books that I used to like, once I learn the author / actor / whatever is kind of a trash person, it just ruins the experience for me.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    First off, the kagi news is a bummer. I’ve really liked it and picked up a subscription mostly because of some buzz I saw around here, but seeing this news is a shame and setting up some red flags in my mind.

    But to answer your question, I think I personally have a couple ways I approach this…

    1. If the evidence someone is transphobic, racist, etc…is from a long time ago (eg someone is digging up ancient tweets to prove someone is some sort of “-ist” today), I tend to give them more grace because people should be allowed to change. I know I didn’t have great views on some of this stuff when I was younger and it’s easy to forget these celebrities/people in power are fallible human beings. I’ll take their response to unearthing these views as a sign of whether or not they’re worth supporting going forward. If they’re regretful and seem like they’re trying to do better, I’m good. The kagi creator seems to not pass this standard for me.

    2. If it’s something I want to use/consume and it could impact more than just the individual. JK Rowling is a good example of this. I’d struggle to want to buy any of her books again because I see a clearer line of sight from my purchase to her pocket. But something like Hogwarts Legacy, which I knew I would enjoy and my wife would love, and is made by many people with a passion for her world, I’m OK with it. The line to Rowling is a lot blurrier and impacts people who don’t have a say in what project(s) they work on.

    It’s also easier to ignore or skip smaller scale things like an indie game from a deplorable developer vs. the next Marvel/HP/insert your beloved franchise game from someone equally deplorable. None of this is ever perfect and time and attention are finite resources for all of us. If Harry Potter is how you need to unwind because it’s your favorite thing, more power to you. It’s not my job nor anyone else’s to police the things you like or make you feel bad for liking them.

    We should all do our best to try and support good people in a system that incentivizes bad people and give ourselves some grace when we (seemingly inevitably these days) find out those people were actually scum.

    • Gaywallet (they/it)OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 year ago

      I think there’s something to be said about timeframe even for individuals who held deplorable views. Purchasing art from a dead artist doesn’t go to supporting their life or spreading their shitty viewpoint - instead it will go to a company which holds the rights or an estate which benefits the family. Unless we happen to know the company/estate is deplorable in some way or another, we shouldn’t judge them based on the connection with the original artist - after all we don’t get to choose our parents and may not hold the same views they do.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        100%. And going down that path you can start to enter into the whole “OK, so all companies are bad or do bad things, but I also need to be a functioning member of society.”

        I can hate what Shell/Marathon/BP are doing to the environment but I also need to make sure my car gets me to work. Google or Apple can enact terrible policies I disagree with but generally speaking I have to deal with them to have a cell phone. Easier when we’re discussing a piece of artwork (not a core need in life) but it’s where my comment about a system that incentivizes “bad people” really came from.

        So I think my moral philosophy is actually closest to show The Good Place now that I see it written out!

  • Nate Cox
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    Kagi is hard because it is so very much better than any alternative I have tried. I don’t like the guy’s views but it would substantially impact something I do for work and pleasure dozens of times every day to give it up, so I’m really struggling with that.

  • the w
    link
    fedilink
    English
    15
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As many have said there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and you can’t know everything about everyone, so no matter what you’re going to end up supporting something unethical at some point.

    That being said, all I can do is act on the information I have, and when I learn about some situation like this, I don’t have an easy answer or decision flow chart. But I do ask myself two questions.

    How much will my support enable more of the behaviour I find abhorrent? And how much will the knowledge ruin my appreciation of the thing?

    I cannot read Ender’s Game even though I always meant to since I found out about Orson Scott Card’s politics about ten years back. And while there’s (somehow) way, way worse people out there the knowledge, especially the holocaust denial, just ruins any enjoyment I could get from the books or movies, regardless of any separate-art-from-artist arguments.

    But I am a huge Lovecraft fan, and he was also just the worst. But the guy’s dead, it doesn’t matter if I buy his books or not. And even then despite his popularity across Geekdom he’s a relatively niche author. His views aren’t going to reach a lot of people.

    I think this works out differently if the creator is someone current and powerful or influential. If we can blunt the impact of a popular creator spreading toxic views that prevents a lot more bad than than the same frome someone dead or niche. Even if that’s only lack of support, that’s still more.

    I guess what I’m saying it is has less to do with the details of the bad views or actions, and more about much my support helps enable those. The less I contribute by watching or buying or clicking, the less I’m concerned about it. Unless it just personally bothers me.

    I don’t know if that’s the right answer but it’s the one I’ve got right now

    • mayooooo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Well let me just help you about Ender there - imagine an akschyaly clever kid, fedora wearing, huffing their own farts while being annoying on twitter and trying to suck their own dick all day. The image is a pimply kid almost reaching their dick, the cum blasts past their face and hits mein kampf on the spine, the kid goes into a crying diatribe about something.

      I think that’s about it really, might have missed a part of the plot

  • Powderhorn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61 year ago

    The only thing that’s changed about artists and people in power is that we now know a lot more about their beliefs and personal lives than we used to. One thing that hasn’t changed is that everybody has skeletons in their closet and is the hero in their own story.

    As such, and given that I don’t seek out salacious details about people I’ll never meet, so long as their irrelevant-to-the-content/product personal views don’t filter into what they produce, I tend to be unaware of anything else about them.

    There are of course exceptions, with Musk being at the top of the list. But as I’m not in an income bracket that would let me avail myself of any of his products, it’s still largely irrelevant.

    And the further back you go in someone’s history to find dirt, the more likely they’ve changed. I’d hate to be judged now by some of my early columns in college when I was in my edgy atheist libertarian raver phase, so I’m inclined to give others a pass on adolescent musings.

    With more recent stuff, as people let more of their personality into their crafted public personas, it’s not all that difficult to deduce whether their worldview is going to be offensive. But commerce overall is not about whether I’d enjoy grabbing a beer with someone so much as whether their product fulfills a need.

  • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 year ago

    I am a very “death of the artist” kind of guy, but I won’t give my money to people will will use it for evil. So while I’m perfectly happy to, say, buy a Roman Polanski movie secondhand, I’m not going to purchase a new copy.

  • fracture [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 year ago

    ever since kagi expressed that they’re not interested in caring about the effect of LLMs on the environment (https://kagifeedback.org/d/2425-would-love-to-see-a-blog-post-about-how-kagi-views-the-environmental-impact-of-ai-and-the-ethics-of-how-llms-are-trained/2), i had already hopped off because i could see their talk about “making the world a more humane place” was just talk. so i’m not really surprised to see this shit unfolding either

    i’m surprised to see that the dude who replied on my post is actually the kagi guy, though. that’s surprising, i took him for some q&a support mod lmao

    but yea i’m trans so i do my best not to support transphobic (or otherwise bigoted) people. seems like it’s in my best interest y’know. and sometimes i don’t know! i was pretty excited for kagi at first blush, it’s really a shame they’re not worth the time or effort

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How much does a creator’s worldview influence whether you use their tech or consume their media?

    Depending on what we call “worldview”… either 0%, or 100%.

    In this particular case:


    SearXNG

    SearXNG is a free internet metasearch engine which aggregates results from more than 70 search services. Users are neither tracked nor profiled.

    • OpenSource
    • Free
    • Self-hostable
    • User configurable

    Kagi

    Kagi Inc. is a company […]

    • Closed
    • For profit
    • Not verifiable, not controllable
    • You pay for the privilege

    Google, Bing, etc.

    • Closed
    • For profit
    • Not verifiable, not controllable
    • You don’t pay, you’re the product

    How much does their respective owner’s worldview matter to me?

    • Being open and verifiable: 100%
    • Giving full control to the user: 100%
    • Wanting to sell my tracking data: 0%
    • Misrepresenting their intentions: 100%
    • Having an unrelated opinion about politics, religion, human rights, or other: 0%

    As for art, my opinion of the art doesn’t change whether I think the artist is a great or a horrible person; doing otherwise would be either dishonest… or imply the art can’t stand on by itself (I call that kind of art “trash”, no matter the author).

  • luciole (he/him)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    A creator’s worldview influences me a whole lot on whether I’ll use their stuff or not. I don’t think we can afford the luxury of supporting jerks anymore. There’s just too much shit going on. Consuming is voting. That’s the rational part. The affective part is that when I learn that the creator’s a jerk, I just don’t feel like engaging with their stuff anymore. It’s basically a turn off for me.

    The kagi controversy is unfortunate. I’ve been considering biting the bullet, but there’s no way I’m paying for a search engine I don’t feel good about. Also I very naively didn’t realize until now kagi was just aggregating Google, Yandex or whatever, stripping the advertisement rot and applying some extra magic. Won’t they get the rug pulled right from under them the second they reach any sort of relevance?