ReCursing @ ReCursing @lemmings.world

Posts

1

Comments

226

Joined

12 mo. ago

Sure. I'll keep telling others that too because I'm right

It says they're high density, so use them as ammo for your rail gun

Poorer white people. Even those who know they're poor think it won;t target them, only those who are worse than them somehow

I'm calling you a luddite because you're being a luddite. AI is just a new medium, that's all it is, you're just scared of new technology just like how idiots were scared of photography a hundred and some years ago. You do not have an argument that holds any water because they were all made against photography, and many of them against pre-mixed paints before that!

Also I'm done arguing with anti-ai luddites because you are about as intractable as trump cultists. I'll respond to a level or two of comments in good faith because someone else might see your nonsense and believe it but this deep it's most likely you and me, and you're not gonna be convinced of anything.

Stop being a luddite

I'm impressed you've managed to go from "wrong" to "not even wrong" - that is so far from correct that you can't even conceive of the right answer. Stop being a luddite

Trying to redefine the word "learn" won;t help your cause either. Stop being a luddite and realise that it is neither useless not wasteful

Well he tried but he failed, so...

You're being disingenuous by trying to redefine the concept of theft. It does not steal anything by any definition of the word. It learn using a neural network similar to, but much simpler than, the one in your head

That is at least borderline more correct, but it's still wrong. It learns using a neural network much like, but much simpler than, the one in your head

It does not steal art. It does not store copies of art, it does not deprive anyone of their pictures, it does not remix other people's pictures, it does not recreate other people's pictures unless very very specifically directed to do so (and that''s on the human not he AI), and even then it usually gets things "wrong". If you don't completely redefine theft then it does not steal art

Honestly the need for art has nothing to do with the urge to create art. People will create art no matter what and capitalism treats them like shit for it but that;s a totally different argument

Camp Damascus by Chuck Tingle. I was expecting a trashy slasher with some queer elements and an autistic protagonist, what I got was a good supernatural thriller with some queer elements and a very believable autistic protagonist - I would genuinely recommend it.

The writing is the weakest part, it feels very kind of pedestrian, like "here's some words explaining what's happening" rather than being artistic or beautiful or evocative but it's good enough for the story and characters to come through, and they're great. So remove the writing quality from the equation and it could be absolutely excellent

I mean theoretically, but it was crap like everything else in that film. He figured nothing out on his own

I have a different brand of multicooker, and it's excellent. The "boil" function goes down as low as 40C so I use it to sous vide things fairly often

I'm not sure how much of a scandal it was outside of those directly affect, but I was in the circle. A group of us, led by one of the younger drama teachers, went to the Edinburg Fringe Festival (a big literary, drama and comedy festival) with a bunch of short comic plays by Checkov (yes, really!). he was attractive enough that he had to make sure not to be alone in a room with a female student in case of rumours, but he was decent and would never had done anything like that. He got his wife and his brother involved too, which was cool, we all got on really well. We had a lot of fun, it was great, and, amazingly for the first time at the Fringe, didn't actually lose money! (I think we made like fifty quid between twelve of us, so we didn't exactly make a profit either, but it was an amazing experience)

Then his brother and his wife had an affair and ran away together

a technology that is a threat to human creativity

Perhaps the most stupid take on this subject I have seen. Nothing will stop humans creating, definitely not a new creative medium! That's all it is, by the way, a new medium, like photography a hundred and some years ago, or digital painting more recently. Most of the same arguments were made against pre mixed paints - Turner was dragged for using them, for example!

Do you go into a gallery and scream "THIS ART WAS INSPIRED BY PICASSO. WHY DOESN'T IT SAY THAT! tHIS IS THEFT!" - no, I suspect you don't because that would be stupid. That's what you sound like here

Amusingly, every argument against ai art was made against photography over a hundred years ago, and I bet you own a camera - possibly even on the device you wrote your stupid comment on!

Nope. Stop with the luddite lies please

Generative AI steals art.

No it doesn't. Drop that repeated lie please