lucidinferno @ lucidinferno @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

20

Joined

2 yr. ago

Reminds me of what I heard from a comedian a while back, about how restaurants slowly lose what made them great in the first place, until they become a poor imitation of Applebees, or similar restaurants, because “that’s what people want”. They then eventually fail, because if you want Applebees, you go to Applebees.

But how is Star Trek not doing so hot if I just read this:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/star-trek-franchise-made-2-202843856.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALfICqIPVLbKoRwsReQJxRCI-TT82SDIYzfpW-2AtJJIFkUDte6RYqje2cLjYdUSMHv8aIZAChVfJbG67Oc0gMeMq8JnQOsJL7BFn3bOVq88vqS2d91nJ_zezWnxi7NkvgDlCTj3o39JuAUUdGPT0Tq8fUHsiw7PWaskoR9cbDRb

I didn’t read this as fanboy-ism. It’s simply the state of things. If another company wants to step up and produce a series of tech that’s as unfragmented as Apple, one that provides rudimentary protection and privacy, one that shuns ads and doesn’t depend on tracking for its revenue, I’m ready for it.

Ah. The Russian trolls/bots have discovered lemmy. It was nice while it lasted.

I hear you, and I thought about that before posting the comment, but does method matter? Does human skill in something make it any more right, or does a computer being directed to do something make it any more wrong? The final product is essentially the same, no matter how it was achieved.

Whether I, unprovoked, physically attack someone or I command my dog to attack someone, I’m being held responsible for the attack. It’s not so much the method or the tool that was used as it is the product, because the act is wrong.

Better yet, to your point, whether I draw the Simpsons and sell that image or print an image of the Simpsons and sell it, it’s considered wrong without permission of Groening.

The question is: Is it wrong to impersonate without intention of deceiving, using any method? I’m not arguing for or against. Simply asking moral questions. It’s a quandary, for sure.

How is the AI impersonation of Carlin different from when Paramount used actors who looked like Queen Elizabeth or Barbara Bush, or human impersonators who sound just like the real person they’re impersonating (besides the obvious difference)?

I’m not saying Dudesy is in the right. Making an AI system sound like someone somehow feels different than an impersonator doing the same thing. But I don’t know why I feel that way, as they’re extremely similar cases.

Smaller. Thinner.

Displaced would be a better word.

As a bald man, I support this.

What do you suppose could “heat” the lenses?

Seems Reddit has joined us. Only a matter of time.

The commenter is talking about adding heaters, not anti-aircraft weaponry. There’s plenty of examples of things developed by the military that are used in civilian products.

Small business owner here. Good regulations are what allows my customers to trust me, or at least trust that I’m not willing to go to prison for lying about my product, or worse.

So, Extremis from Iron Man 3?

“Some of you may die, but it’s a risk I’m willing to take.” - Lord Farquaad and Musk

Good point.

Wow. I wasn’t aware of hbomberguy. Seems more of an “attack the person” and less of an “attack the idea” kind of person.

You’re right. Made sense as I wrote it, but I always do see TNG. Fixing it.

Epic poems, such as the Iliad, were the preferred storytelling methods at one time, yet society had little issue with building upon that as they left it behind. It’s one thing to prefer something, and another to say that because something was once one way, that’s how it always should be. Things change and hopefully improve. Kind of the main theme of Trek.