IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I have a Greg cherry hologram
It's kind of like this but better.

https://youtu.be/a6qGaQ-_0F8

Mine is a pair of binoculars sitting on a tree looking into a rainforest. In the distance in the lenses are a snake and a parrot. It has to be placed in the perfect shadow box with a single point of light above it at the perfect angle in order to be seen.

It is one of a kind. It has infinite value to me. It has some market value that somebody might pay for it. His method of creating these things is lost at the moment. It is probably the only thing I've kept through the last 20 moves.

When I first bought it I had to put it on layaway because it costs way too much. But it took a couple of months of multiple payments before he was ready to hand it over to me. The next week the shop was closed and if I had taken another week to pay I would not have been able to get it.

There's history associated with it. There's history associated with the creator and the stages that his art and production capabilities went through.

Would a perfect modern copy be worth just as much to me? Not a chance.
New But if someone *could* reproduce it ...
The price would be based on what new users would pay, not on how much you value yours.
--

Drew
     Well, so much for my plan to make a fortune out of these things - (rcareaga) - (26)
         Of course I have an opinion - (drook) - (3)
             I wonder how this applies to code generators? - (crazy) - (2)
                 Or compilers - (drook)
                 In my line of argumentation, that's cut and dry: - (CRConrad)
         workaround include that AI in a corporation and have the corporation copyright the material -NT - (boxley)
         I'm with the CO and its teeming myriads. - (CRConrad) - (15)
             Quibble - (malraux) - (3)
                 So should the copyright to the result belong to... - (CRConrad) - (2)
                     Hence "quibble" instead of "substantive argument" ;-) -NT - (malraux) - (1)
                         👍🏻 -NT - (CRConrad)
             What about landscape photos? - (drook) - (6)
                 rofl sounds like a familiar argument -NT - (boxley) - (5)
                     It sounds silly now, but painters used to say exactly that -NT - (drook) - (4)
                         you wern't saying that a number of years ago -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                             Which "that" was I not saying? -NT - (drook) - (2)
                                 Re: Which "that" was I not saying? - (boxley) - (1)
                                     First difference I can think of is IP vs physical - (drook)
             Jackson sucking on that - (rcareaga) - (3)
                 "This"? - (CRConrad) - (2)
                     Hmm, now that you've prompted me to think more about it ... - (drook) - (1)
                         Depends on how you count coup on the trump. - (CRConrad)
         For the defense - (rcareaga) - (3)
             The thing about "in the style of ..." - (drook) - (2)
                 I have a Greg cherry hologram - (crazy) - (1)
                     But if someone *could* reproduce it ... - (drook)
         I think you're Ok, if this story is correct. - (Another Scott)

Beer is better than pain.
69 ms