I don’t have a single favorite, but every now and then a critter will become the subject of my latest ADHD hyperfixation. I remember thinking skunks were cool in 5th grade. They’re like badgers with chemical weapons. For the months leading up to getting my first guide dog I devoured stuff about dogs in general. I had always had pet dogs so it wasn’t a new subject, just a more intense interest.

For a while it was octopi, then parrots. For some time in 2015 or early 2016 it was possums, the US’s only marsupial.

Right now it’s monkeys. I used to think monkeys were gross and disturbing in an uncanny valley sort of way, so humanlike but not human at the same time. But I’ve taken a shine to orangutans. They’re quiet and introverted like me. Also new world monkeys like capuchins and woollies. Having a prehensile tail would be awesome.

  • a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca
    4·
    2 days ago

    Right now it’s monkeys. I used to think monkeys were gross and disturbing in an uncanny valley sort of way, so humanlike but not human at the same time.

    I agree with you that it’s monkeys. Thats why this image is my profile pic.

    It’s a selfie taken of a monkey. IIRC it became a precedent setting case in copyright law, because the owner of the camera tried to claim ownership over the photo. The issue was that you need to actually take the picture to own the it. But the guy didn’t take the photo; the money took the photo. And monkeys cannot own property, under the law. So the image became public domain. Here’s the Wikipedia page on the case

    • early_riser@piefed.socialOPEnglish
      1·
      11 hours ago

      I’ve seen that pic around and wondered if it was photoshopped. That nose looks really human. Anyway, now I know it’s a macaque taking a selfie.

      Interesting tidbit from the wikipedia article,

      On 21 August 2014 the United States Copyright Office published an opinion, later included in the third edition of the office’s Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, released on 22 December 2014, to clarify that “only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines without human intervention”

      (emphasis mine)

      Wonder what that means for AI images.

      • a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca
        1·
        9 hours ago

        Yes, actually, I think this law is what is responsible for recent rulings in the US, where it was found that AI generated art is not copyrightable.

        Maybe we have this monkey to thank for setting that precedent. Forget Harambe this monkey is our true saviour.

        • early_riser@piefed.socialOPEnglish
          1·
          5 hours ago

          I think in a vacuum I would have agreed with the photographer. They spent the time and effort to acquire the photo. But I suppose when making legal decisions you have to think about how it will affect other situations.

          I also wonder how PETA thought the monkey could have possibly exercised its copyright on the image.