Huh. Based on the community this was posted in, I can assume that the answer the video comes to is “yes” and not watch it. But according to Betteridge’s law of headlines the answer is “no.” I need to argue about this without watching it but I don’t know what stance to argue about.
Ah! I’ll use the Orbit plugin to get an AI to summarize the video for me. Hm. The AI-generated summary says the video describes an anecdote about music copyright violations, talks about some ethical considerations about both music and software piracy, and then:
The speaker concludes by acknowledging the complexity of the issue and the importance of considering the perspectives of all parties involved.
So I guess the answer was “Maybe?” How am I supposed to have a pointless Internet argument about “Maybe?”
Bah. Someone attack me for using AI, at least that’s a debate I can sink my teeth into.
Lazy prick! Should have just put the video on in the background while doing dishes, or do what I did and briefly skim the comments for someone to fight with! AI is dumb, it’s not even named effectively and you’re dumb for using it and a sheeple for calling it AI in the first place!
Fight me! ❤️
Joke’s on you, I have a dishwasher machine! Robots do my dishes for me too! It is you who is the dumb one, having to labor manually as you do!
Ah, there we go. Thanks.
And now I’m here to fight with both of you, not about what you’re arguing about, but I’m going to police your tone and call you both stupid because you didn’t argue in the arbitrary fashion I’ve determined is “correct!”
This is the least helpful contribution I can make, while simultaneously attacking you both!
