petrol_sniff_king @ petrol_sniff_king @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Posts

0

Comments

749

Joined

2 yr. ago

Elon actually hands these out to people who don't want them because they were unpopular and an easy means of telling chuds apart from... uh, chads? There's a good chance hers is a forced advertisement and not something she's actually paying for.

they’re more worried about grocery store prices than they are about race bigotry

So... wouldn't appealing to their grocery store prices mean something, then?

I don't want any. :(

He's advocating for eliminating the rich.

Which would make for a better world. Which he believes in.

You can assume he means himself as well.
If we take care of the billionaires, and he starts getting defensive, then we can oppose him. It's easy.

Less than zero?

Maybe if they can't do anything, these useless fucks should all resign and retire. Clearly, it wouldn't make one difference.

"Why would you want to, pop culture is vapid"

A lot of these people think they're better than you for having more s o p h i s t i c a t e d and mature, adult-like interests.

I won't challenge them directly, I guess, because it's the entire thread and that would be aggressive, but it is rooted in insecurity.

To he fair, though, I don't think the message was lost.
This is an absurdly popular song; he didn't say it, but I did hear it. And he did say "I hear you like 'em young" and "a minooor~~", which aren't really subtle.

Honestly, I thought he skipped it because Standards and Practices might have considered it too uncouth for all-ages television.

Why didn't you say you're a UK citizen?

Because informing you isn't his fucking job?

Here's a trick you can use the next time you talk to somebody:

"Hey, why did you pick the UK of all places? What do you mean it's the only place you can live legally?"

But the strategy for dealing with them is different.
I understand that you're upset and scared, but we need solutions now, not squabbling.

No minds were changed that day. It's just sad.

No one's mentioning this, and it is important: you have to remember that these are challenges you make in public.

If she refrains from making statements in front of you, and you are in front of children, you've just spared them some of her bullshit. You might have taught them a bit about resisting claims like hers on their own, too.

Winning people over directly is great, but it's really hard to do, especially with today's conservative.

but I justify it by pointing to things like splatter or fluid acrylic painting.

The counter I would give here is that those are just techniques. The challenge, then, is whether the generation machine can be made to do things that are interesting and meaningful. I know it can produce spectacle, but spectacle and meaning are different concepts.

I don't know much Pollock, but isn't he valued largely for his process and expressionism? I'm not making this accusation of you, you do seem to actually care, but a lot of people who bring him up seem to think that his work actually is random and unintelligible—I don't think that it is.

I will concede that the process of interacting with the generation machine to produce something is a creative one, I just don't think it's anywhere near what a lot of proponents claim it be.

I've used Suno, and my lasting impression of it is that it was fun, sometimes really funny, and overall kind of soul sucking. As a musician, there were essentially no times that I felt anything produced there was mine. It was just novelty. Some of it sounded really cool, but none of it was an expression of me or what I was really looking for.

I think that ultimately my push back is on the folks that argue that it can't be art.

I'm not really jumping in on this discussion, but I did want to add one thing:

I can believe two things at once.

AI generated media can't be art ... because the whole purpose of a generative AI machine is to alleviate the burden of decision making. The fewer places you let something decide for you, the more "art" you can imbue into your project. Art is a communicative effort.

Artists can use AI generated media ... but the points of interest, the meaning, would not (necessarily) be the decisions the machine made.

An example above, I forget if it was you or someone else, shows a pen sketch of a scene then filled in by the generator, and I think the artist there can be given credit for the perspective, the framing of the subject, the mech-suit, the sci-fi aesthetic; but I wouldn't credit them with the tally marks on her left shoulder, or the shape details of her eyes, or the various light-up displays that dot the walls.

There's also something to be said for choosing as opposed to creating outright, but I think we're losing ourselves in myopic details at this point.

The bottom line is that, aside of any ethics issues, I'm not that upset about AI media that's honest about what it is. I watch youtube channels that depend on AI for their performance art. But, AI proponents love selling this technology as a replacement for people, which is a sentiment I find... disgusting. Inhuman.

And, I find it really sad the way a person who spent the better part of their life perfecting a style and technique can be essentially shoved out of their own niche by the 10,000 style-copy images a generator can make in an afternoon. This isn't like photography, where painters and camera-snappers can coexist in separate styles of image production: AI generators can replace both.

Sorry, I thought all that was going to be just two paragraphs.

It doesn't even make sense. Conservatives love, love, love AI.

Hey, does anyone remember that 500 billion dollar infrastructure package Trump wants to give AI companies? You should, it was two weeks ago.

The Democrats will field one on purpose to sabotage us. They don't mind losing if it means a progressive won't win.

I mean, at the very least, the man could take his dick out of the Ukraine.

He is the richest person on the planet and currently dicking around in the US government's department of the treasury as an unelected, regular citizen with no repercussions or consequences.

We are long past the man being a nobody.

Also, his gaming candle is stupid and he deserves the mockery.

Their central criticism is that people are lulled into more right-leaning positions by right-wing propaganda, which is true: the right wing has bought basically all media. Everybody takes marching orders.

So, people are stupid, but this is a deliberate move: stupidity benefits the right.

If by "appeasement of the right" you mean "accepting of the genocide," I will fault no person for caring about what's happening over there. If the democrats wanted to win, they should have let go of their psychotic, white-knuckle grip on the Israel military fund. It doesn't surprise me at all that this severely weakened their bid for the presidency.

That said, I can't say we're in a better position now with Trump. My hope for the people of Gaza now is either maga incompetence, or that Trump and Netanyahu make some kind of fascist quid-pro-quo deal not unlike the "Trump saves TikTok" publicity stunt.