No, no, and also no. Try again? Or cram your face into a blender? Either is good with me
No, no, and also no. Try again? Or cram your face into a blender? Either is good with me
Oh you’re a luddite, you’re also a hater and about as intractable and strupid as a trump supporter. You can be many crappy things at once!
Hopefully this means the haters will shut up and we can get on with using it for useful stuff
The amount of solar energy that hits the Earth every day is enough to power it for a year, and that’s not including wind, wave, or anything else. (yes I know we can’t gather it all but the amount of energy available is absolutely gigantic
The anti-ai luddites are about as intractable as trump cultists, and their arguments just as asinine
I think you mean:
yes (the environmental angle is a complete distraction and red herring from moving towards more sustainable energy production generally; the ethical one is just plain nonsense spread by people with absolutely no idea how these things work)
yes (people use and like them, people have fun with them and create great art with them. You might not but that’s a you problem)
and … well actually probably no tbh (but that’s a problem with capitalism not technology).
Stop making shit up to dismiss new technology because you’re a luddite
Devil’s lettuce is my favoruite
“Women are a bit of a grey area” - I choose to believe that’;s because my phone is pro-trans but doesn’t quite get it
Coroner??? As in the person who notes that people are dead??? That’s an elected position? What? Why? How can that even possibly be political? “This person has gone red but they should have gone blue instead. Make them get back up and start walking around until they do dying right!”; “Cause of death: Being a gorram <insult of choice>!”; “You’re not allowed to die, we’ve had too many deaths this week and I won’t get elected again if you do. Stop pretending to be cold and stiff!”. What?
Sure. I’ll keep telling others that too because I’m right
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
Bit tired (had to get up too early today) but otherwise okay, thanks. How’s your face? Blended to a fine paste yet?