Sure, get needlessly antagonistic, provoke a response, decide to run from the confrontation you caused, and I’m the childish one. Fuck outta here.

That’s purposely obtuse. Of course guns have a purpose, you even listed one.

I don’t think they’re offended. I think they’re saying that a tool is a tool. A gun or AI are only dangerous if misused, like a hydraulic press.

We can’t go around removing the tools because some people will abuse them. Any tool can kill someone.

We can’t just use the fear of death to justify any means to prevent it. If we found out we could live eternally but had to destroy other creatures or humans to do so, we would consider that to be too high a cost.

Sure, there are costs that are too high for anything.

The cost for AI at the moment is just immoral. Even those who have found methods to deal with the costs, are still benefiting from calling it AI in the form of investments and marketing. Calling their work AI is worth money because of all of this fraudulent behavior.

This is the part where it breaks down though. There’s nothing inherently immoral about AI. It’s not the concept of AI you have problems with. It’s the implementation. I hate a lot of the implementation, too. Shoehorning an AI into everything, using AI to justify a reduction in labor, that all sucks. The tool itself, though? Pretty fuckin awesome.

If I started growing and producing my own organic abuse free heroin and selling it, it would still be immoral because I’m benefiting from the economy created by the illegal market. I’m participating in that market despite my efforts.

Are we comparing this to cancer research still? If so that’s a bit of a WILD statement. It’s pretty close to the COVID vaccine denial mentality - because it was made using something I don’t like/fully understand, it must be bad.

Ive said before that if these companies doing the ethical AI stuff want to stop being criticized for being part of this AI nonsense, feel free to call it something else. AI is overly broad and applied incorrectly all the time as it is anyways, and is mainly applied to things to draw money and interest that otherwise wouldnt exist.

Ok let’s go back to drugs, then. If we were making your organic, free trade heroin, but called it beroin so that we’re not piggybacking off the heroin market, we’re good? No, that doesn’t make sense. Heroin will fuck up someone’s life regardless of what you call it, how it was produced, eetc.There’s (virtually) no legitimate, useful application of heroin. Probably not one we’d ever see the production of broadly okayed.

Conversely, you’ve already agreed that there are ethical uses and applications of AI. It doesn’t matter what the name is, it’s the same technology. AI has become the term for this technology, just like heroin has become the term for that drug, and it doesn’t matter what else you want to call it, everyone already knows what you mean. It doesn’t matter what you call it, its uses are still the same. It’s impact is still the same.

So yeah, if you just have a problem with, say, cancer researchers using AI, and would rather them use, idk, AGI or any of the other alternative names, I think you’re missing the point.

why do you care how fast it happens

I care how fast it happens because I don’t want it to slow down.

Probably not the best to imply you want cancer treatment research to slow down simply because you don’t like the tool used to do it. There’s a lot of shit wrong with our current implementations of AI, but let’s not completely throw the baby out with the bath, eh?

The fact that you think the only thing you’re doing is entering a prompt says enough. There’s faaaaaaaar more to the process than simply prompting. You clearly don’t want to engage with anything other than the strawman you have in your head, so you have fun with that.

AI generated art is fundamentally different from printing a reproduction of something that exists 1:1. I’m not interested in going on depth on a technical discussion on AI, anyway. I’d rather discuss the philosophy.

As far as the role of man versus machine, using AI as a tool is more like being a director or composer. You determine the composition. The setting. The subject. The style. Let the machine do the labor of simply outputting, and then you tell it what you don’t like about this output.back and forth, until you arrive at whatever finished is. It’s as much art as a conductor in a symphony, or a director on a set, simply giving direction to a machine.

The issue that people have, or should have, with AI isn’t with AI art, it’s with it being shoe horned into everything that can make a buck. Open source generative AI running on my own machine has allowed me to express myself in ways I never could before. The point of art is expression, and regardless of the tools used to create, that output is still an expression of me. More people should have access to tools to express themselves, in whatever way they can.

Art has always been limited by access. Either to the tools, or to the ability to learn and practice. AI, at least in its current form, with open source models readily available, is only allowing more people to create who never could before. Getting into any art is expensive, both in money and time. Anyone with a half decent rig can get something set up and add a touch of art to their world, and begin to express themselves in SOME way.

That probably wasn’t the target audience of the article. It was probably people who were more likely to know Excalibur than Durendal.

Honestly, was probably Britain stealing it for a museum.

The point is that Excalibur is well known and Durendal isnt. They want eyes, and so make the article headline reference something everyone knows, then educate in the article body.

Sure, you don’t need to stress eat while you’re bored. But eating is already a thing you do, it makes you feel good, and it’s there.

Imagine if you actually had to smoke a cigarette 3 times a day. The smoke is a requirement for your body. It makes you feel good, but you can go to excess and it’s bad for you. This is MUCH closer to food.

You HAVE to eat. You eat daily. Not doing so is a disorder. So you can’t just not eat, you have to develop a healthy relationship with food. With this thing that tastes good, makes you feel good, and you have to do anyway. Well, that’s okay. We can have a healthy relationship with it!

Oh no. You’re sad. Something bad happened. You need something to help you out. Well, how about some food? It’s usually pretty enjoyable. You eat every day anyway, so like… It’s not a HUGE deal, surely, and you’re fuckin SAD man. Fuck it, whole pizza it is! Let’s get happy!

Rinse and repeat, because life is inevitably a big series of bad things (and good, but we’re not focusing on those) happening. Now your emotional coping is tied to food. It’s not as addictive as nicotine, but it is a requirement for life. It’s a lot harder to change THAT than it is to just say “don’t smoke.” It’s like going to a smoker and saying “smoke, but only 3 times a day.”

I don’t see any normalizing of obesity. I see a lot of empathy for people whose circumstances have led them to this point. I see a lot of explaining why someone may actively choose foregoing physical health for another reason.

You can support people who are in a position, even by “their own hand” without saying it’s cool, or normal, or anything. You can give just a little back to these people, to hopefully help move them back towards an actual normal living without saying where they are now is good or healthy. That’s what I’m seeing.

Time is a cost too. When people say processed foods are cheaper, time is part of that. If you spend an hour grocery shopping, you can buy a processed meal for each day of the week, and take whatever time it is to microwave it. That’s a lot less than the 30 minutes minimum to make a meal from ingredients. That time becomes important when you have obligations past the ‘regular’ 40 hours a week job.

Having a dick is all well and good, but I don’t think I’d want to interact with a person who was entirely 100% a penis. Big difference between having and being.

We also extend some sympathy to the cigarette smoker, to the self harmer. Quitting smoking is HARD. It takes a ton of effort, nicotine is literally addictive. Self harm is indicative of any of a number of mental and emotional issues. Those are a nightmare to address

But at the end of the day, they should just grow up and do it, right? Just don’t smoke. Just don’t cut yourself. Just don’t eat to excess. Simple.

Never mind the literal good deserts some people find themselves in. The decades of misinformation from lobbying groups. The fact that everyone has their own one weird trick,so you don’t know who to believe. The fact that the cheapest food is often the least nutritious. The fact that, increasingly, people have to work more hours to get by, leaving less time for things like cooking a proper meal.

There are real societal factors that play into the obesity epidemic. We didn’t get where we are because everyone was collectively like “let’s just get fat, yeah?” - we were all brought to this point by the influences of the world around us. Personal responsibility is all well and good, but it’s also not the whole game.

Why does it necessarily have to be a celebration? Are quiet hours at shopping centers celebrating sensory disorders?

It’s not about celebrating, even if some people will use it as such. It’s about allowing different people the comfort to experience a thing that most of our society takes for granted.

I’ve never met a fat person who doesn’t want to change their lifestyle. Sure, there are a few who claim that, but in my experience, that’s a defense mechanism from all of the people who look down on them daily. Something like this is only a good thing, offering encouragement at no significant cost.

Counterpoint, no matter the accessibility options included, there’s always going to be a disability that isn’t compatible. The only game that everyone can play is “sitting alone in your room” and some people even struggle with that. There’s always going to be some level of ability required. As much as that sucks, that some people just won’t be able to experience a thing, it sucks more to have no one experience it for fear of excluding those who can’t.

I’ve definitely had my social security card since I was like, 12. Before that, my mom had it. Definitely, 100% did not get it at or around 18