petrol_sniff_king @ petrol_sniff_king @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Posts

0

Comments

719

Joined

2 yr. ago

To be clear, I have no idea what Walt is or isn't. I'm not making a claim there, haha.

it would be irresponsible to turn Nazi into a generic pejorative for "bigot."

I agree... especially if we're talking about historical figures who might be pretty far removed from the modern political climate.

But to be fair, there is a pretty direct connection between bigotry and nazis, modern or otherwise.

Criticizing the term's over use

You can't police overuse. Just disagree and move on.

By constantly handwringing about it every single time it comes up, you end up teaching people that that's the way you are supposed to react to this information. It becomes a thought terminating cliche. Somebody says nazi, and the first thing anyone else thinks about is "well, they're probably just being hyperbolic." You're reinforcing the same narrative.

Like, a good nazi accusation usually comes with an argument. "Such and such is a nazi because of these 6 things I saw them do, and they kicked a dog also," but even then, people will twist themselves into pretzels about whether the word is still "too much" or not. You have to cut them off. It's not relevant. It doesn't need to be given dignity as a criticism. It only serves as a distraction from the 6 points.

People do the exact same thing about the word genocide.

Think about it this way: an actual nazi benefits from these terms being muddy and unworkable, so our strategy cannot depend on clear waters; we will never get them.

we should be more precise with our language

I swear this exact phrase is an FBI plot to get people to doubt everything they see and hear.

"That school shooter was a nazi" "Well, we ought to be careful when saying things like that."
"Elon Musk is a nazi." "And what has he done exactly? You know, it's important to be precise. The story of the boy who cried wolf is that ..."
"Hitler was a nazi." "Well, he was in charge of the nazis. Specificity is really important when handling delicate matters like these, you know."

Not to pick on you specifically, but I am so fucking tired of hearing it.

are flawless

I cannot help you. You are having a conversation in your head that no one else here is a part of. You gotta come back down to Earth, man.

I imagine at least some of that ridicule stems from this being kind of the exact wrong answer to the big, societal "why is everyone so lonely now?" question.

It's a bit like watching a pack-a-day smoker buy lozenges for their throat or something, as if you're not supposed to think about the cancer.

No, it doesn't.

You distrust AI therapists.
You distrust bad therapists.
You do trust good therapists.

See? Works just fine.

Water?

You know that thing our collective parents do when they want to win an argument so they just start attacking you for random things you did 6 years ago? That's exactly what this person is doing.

The person above you, I mean.

Uh. I'm gonna guess no. Is there an anime lady with robots?

Can you be more specific in why do you think that a stem major would need to also study humanities?

The fact that you would even ask this. Do you even know what they study in there? Speaking of rejecting knowledge, my guy, there is so much out there to learn. You have trapped yourself within the smallest box.

is better than "art is something that is made by someone who a subculture of the western world [...]"

Mine is actually "art is communication," but if being dishonest makes you feel better, go for it, buddy.

How would you able to take the script written by the monkey and thrown it into the trash

Why would I throw a marvelous statistical anomaly into the garbage?

Something being art or not cannot depend on the knowledge on who or what did it.

It can. It does. "Welcome to the neighborhood!" from your neighbor and from a local Internet Service Provider inherently mean different things, even if they're "identical."

you may have issues when you see a piece of art without the ability to know it's contexts.

For most of human history, I've been able to assume that something that looks like it was built by people was built by people.

The existence of LLMs has made me more cautious, yeah. Seems like a societal net-negative.

If we want an objective truth

God, this is why stem majors need to take humanities.

God, this image is cool. Very NaissancE, if you've ever played that.

That version of Hamlet is not art, but Shakespeare's version is?

Yes. For the same reason that training a chatbot on your mom's happy birthday texts will never be good enough.

As generative algorithms are hand made by the artist,

Oh, would you look at that, intentionality. Maybe they don't share that characteristic.

As generative algorithms are hand made by the artist, while in AI art the algorithms are made as a generic tool

So, you agree they're different.

I feel compelled to ask this, as if I am pulled into it by the sheer gravity of this question: why did you bring it up, then?

You "can't say you're surprised" that anti-AI people are left of the overton window? Amazing.

Even the wind and the rain

Sorry, those aren't people. The Grand Canyon might be awe-inspiring, but it's not art.

This is what it always comes down to. Every single one of you thinks that art is spectacle. It's very consumerist of you.

Holding a pencil over a piece of paper don't make you a master of graphite on canvas.

But it does make you an artist.

The only reason you care about the wikipedia article you linked me is because it is a technical defense of the modern thing people are obviously pissed about.

So you're right, I don't really care; it has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Well, it's a shame that chatgpt through sheer corporate momentum has completely erased whatever branch of artistic expression this is.

You should be pissed at Sam Altman for appropriating your culture.