top | item 33167747

(no title)

jVinc | 3 years ago

This is such a weird drama. The way I read it SD was effectively trying to put pressure on a guy because he developed a popular UI for using SD, and made that UI also support another model. So all their moral grandstanding is effectively just about trying to keep the popular gateway site pointing only at them, but their throwing shit at the guy who gave them that huge free PR push... What an odd position, but understandable, it looks like the people behind SD are a bunch of amateurs who weren't ready for the widespread attention and rather than ride the wave they are trying to shut down the beaches to claim that they own the ocean.

discuss

order

avereveard|3 years ago

it's seem a case of "build an audience and monetize later" except they gave the golden gose itself to the audience instead of the egg,

now they're in "monetize later" and some rando's internet repo is more usable and has a better pipeline than their "dreamstudio", and to boot now these rare gtx aren't rare anymore thanks to the bitcoin crash, so enthusiast can readily use the model at home.

ronsor|3 years ago

Nitpick, but it's not so much the Bitcoin crash as it is Ethereum switching away from proof-of-work (GPU) mining.

ShamelessC|3 years ago

Indeed it's a decision that feels like it was made in a tonedeaf echo chamber. As a rule of thumb, if it is allowed on GitHub then coders are probably okay with that, and individual companies will have to use the dmca process.

This goes beyond that, taking the stance that by merely conforming your api to work with a user-provided proprietary checkpoint, you're in the wrong? This same philosophy forbids sharing open source game emulators, and we all know how that turned out (can be the best way to play a game).