It's not so obvious. This is put on by Decrypt Studies, some kind of NFT-centric production studio. It's not hard to imagine that they're doing this for publicity and gave him a substantial fee to be involved.
Fair, I guess that's plausible. Seems more likely to me that he actually is donating all the proceeds and Singer's not getting paid, but I agree that we can't be certain.
Lol fair fair. This feels a bit different because Singer is a notable public figure primarily *because* of his contributions to ethics, charity, etc. It's not like Bezos announcing a donation. But yeah, I agree that cynicism is a reasonable stance here.
Problem is, Singer is *also* notable for openly saying he doesn’t give nearly as much away as he thinks is right, and has a complicated justification for why that should be so
(a) it says right there I’m obviously making a joke which, granted, doesn’t come off as much in the comments further down where I become genuinely sceptical of how much this really reaches people who need it
(b) you are replying to a four month old comment
(c) it doesn’t follow from any premises here that Singer is either good or bad
> it says right there I’m obviously making a joke
where?
> you are replying to a four month old comment
okay. and you’re responding
> it doesn’t follow from any premises here that Singer is either good or bad
its a normative claim that indicates I have similar ethics to Singer
NFTs are dumb as hell and scammy but if the profit is used for effective charity then I’m fine with that. That’s pretty easily justified imo
I’m responding out of curtesy, I have no idea why you thought I would care that you happen to like Peter Singer on this, and there’s nobody else around watching
[deleted]
Lol
Now that’s doing good better!