Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BL
Posts
0
Comments
178
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I don't think you're on the right track here. There are definitely existing laws in most states regarding 'revenge porn', creating sexual media of minors, Photoshop porn, all kinds of things that are very similar to ai generated deep fakes. In some cases ai deepfakes fall under existing laws, but often they don't. Or, because of how the law is written, they exist in a legal grey area that will be argued in the courts for years.

    Nowhere is anyone suggesting that making deepfakes should be prosecuted as rape, that's just complete nonsense. The question is, where do new laws need to be written, or laws need to be updated to make sure ai porn is treated the same as other forms of illegal use of someone's likeness to make porn.

  • Hypnotics regression absolutely 100% does not work. You're creating false memories, which is incredibly easy to do. Human memory is very, very, very fallible. This nonsense is exactly what triggered the satanic panic in the 70s, where there was a sudden proliferation of stories of childhood ritual abuse all coming from this kind of hypnotic regression, and every single one turned out to be complete fabrications from the subjects being hypnotized.

  • Not just that, there's a bunch of nutjobs that believe FEMA is using the disaster as cover to nationalize the lithium mines near Chimney Rock. There are groups organizing to try to hunt down first responders.

  • Believe it or not, Canada also occasionally has floods that kill people and leave thousands without power for days at a time. Not to mention the wildfires that continue to escalate every year. We're all struggling with climate change and how it's affecting natural disasters.

  • No you aren't, you're using a record shattering disaster to try to make some really fucking stupid point about how vague 'other countries' are somehow much better than America.

    Disasters happen everywhere. Get your head out of your ass, you usually can string together a decent point, but this is just idiotic.

  • "It also seems to me that if we only tell men to never "pursue", but do nothing about the "hard to get"-behaviour, then men who follow the new instructions or script will be left with no chance to meet someone. "

    I was with you 100% up to here. Women are well aware they don't have to 'play hard to get' anymore. This has been a huge cultural shift over the last 70 years, acting like only mens behavior is changing is naive at best.

  • Read my comments further down. Your party affiliation is whatever you decide it is. There are plenty of reasons to register, vote, or support candidates contrary to party affiliation. That doesn't make you 'not party X' unless you decide you are no longer supporting party X. It seems pretty simple to me.

  • Living in a deep red state, it's the only chance I have to cast a vote that matters. Not just the presidency, but most of our state and local politicians are decided in the Republican primary. Half the positions I'm talking about literally run unopposed in the general election. So I'm going to keep voting for the lesser evil and doing what I can where I live.

  • The same way I define if someone is gay, christian, or whatever other personal label, I ask them. If that's not an option, I'm not going to make a judgement based on random shit.

    This guy was a complicated person who doesn't seem to strongly identify with either party, obviously Hannity is full of shit, but that doesn't mean we should lose sight of nuance in our reality.

  • That's moderately useful for statistics purposes, but that's all. It does not mean every individual person who registers as Republican believes in Republican values and votes for Republicans. Nor is it a complete list, plenty of states don't require registration for primaries so there are lots of people who don't bother declaring either way.

  • Well that is my argument, we hit diminishing returns this generation, and further upgrades are a waste of money.

    If you have anything relevant to add, it's certainly welcome, but ignoring context to try to make my point sound worse is just wasting both our time.

  • I'm confused why you seem like you're arguing with me but still fundamentally making the same point. Those improvements don't inherently make games more fun, but they create opportunities for variety and new elements to the medium. It was previous tech improvements that made Halo and F.E.A.R. possible, that's exactly what I'm talking about.

    But processing power isn't really a relevant limitation to game design anymore. I genuinely don't see any future console generations being particularly enticing for me, outside an upgrade to my steam deck, especially when most of what I play is 5-20 years old anyway.