it’s mostly a problem in the situation where a person goes “Racism is over, you shouldn’t complain”
You can’t dismiss the power that race has in people’s lives to this day because institutional racism still exists, and the consequences of the more overt institutional racism of the past are still in effect.
As a p1 bug it will likely be looked at by someone within the next 1-2 years
I worked for Google Ads support for a while and even this dumbed down system completely stumped so many fucking people.
God I hate advertising and advertisers so much.
These useless fucking cunts wanted every feature imaginable, setup for free, with no effort of research done from them.
That job made me hate taxi drivers so much.
“Uhhh mysterious ways is why children get cancer”
This is a copout and you’re a silly little guy
Things kinda have been often like that, not everything was a gem back then either, it’s just that
No open source plagiarism machine :(
If a text is out of your reach currently you can get to it later, as your skill in it improves.
When you do this you’re just reading a completely different (worse) book.
…Must have been the wind.
Users provided additional context to this reply:
This guy is a dumbass lmao
That particular mechanic of “banning” characters may also fuck right off though. I can’t ban sniper when I play TF2
6s players: 😎
As much as I have no obligation to agree with another person’s views, I also have no obligation to argue about them.
There’s clearly views in this world that can be pretty much dismissed outright, if you disagree you’re free to go to a flat earther forum to debate them out of it.
The only reason Musk wants to hide likes is because he agrees with a bunch of really shitty and messed up positions, and he wants to not be responsible for it.
If you like a post saying “I believe that the jews did 9/11” I think it’s fair for someone to look at it and go “Hey that’s obviously fake, really dumb, and kinda hilarious that you’re this stupid.”
I’ll have to look at it!
I think people with ridiculous views should not have an issue with being ridiculed for those views.
It really feels like you’re the immature bunch, trying to hide who you are because you’re too fragile to own up to it if it’s being scrutinized.
Yeah, the FOSS tools right now are usable but they’re nowhere near on the level of stuff like Blender.
I’m hoping that eventually the FOSS tools get on par or exceed commercial ones… though it’s going to take time.
I’ve been using Krita for art and I really like it. The FOSS tools have been getting increasingly better and better, Blender, Godot, and Krita are the ones I’ve used recently and I love them so much.
Now I just want better FOSS video editing.
This guys post history is a hoot
No, there just needs to be some sort of human involvement.
Art is something humans do, computer algorithms cannot do art because they’re not people.
Typing “big boobs anime girl pink hair rain low lighting trending on artstation” into a text box is not human involvement in art, and pretending it is is a slap in the face of every human being in existence who ever liked any art ever.
Because you say so? What makes you the great arbiter of what is and isnt art? You are literally gatekeeping by the very definiton of the word.
I’m fairly sure I mentioned the definition I use for art before. Ai generated images can’t be art because they’re not made by a person, there’s no underlying thought or message, it’s just algorithmic slop.
Same thing goes for a tree growing freely in the woods, there’s no intent behind it, the tree just grows the best it can to fulfil it’s need for sunlight and nutrients, as such it is not art.
Both the tree and AI can create imagery that can be considered beautiful, but beauty != art.
Modern music however is created by people, even if the message behind it is that “I feel so clean like a money machine.”
Mud chocolate bit
The point is that even if AI generated images are trash, they can still do harm to culture.
So peoeple that do things like put a hole in a paint can and let it swing back and forth over a canvas? Is that still humans making art? What about mechanical things spirographs? is that still humans making art? What about digital art the relies heavily on computer tools (including tools that often use AI)? What about photographers? Or what about someone that uses generated AI aspects in their digital art? Your definition is reactionary gatekeeping bullshit. And there is no logical reasoning behind it.
That is all people doing things, yeah.
Okay thats entirely besides the point.
I’m just saying this regarding the dEmOcRaTiSinG aRt cringe, are has been democratic for as long as people could make coherent vocalisations, you people just don’t want to put in any effort into it.
And the Mona Lisa would have been easier to make on a Wacom tablet, but wouldnt be anywhere near the same quality as the original. So Digital art is dangerous too right?
It’s not about how easy it is, it’s about it being easy and artistically worthless. It doesn’t matter if the sprites were scanned sculptures or crayon stickmen, it was art.
You cannot make an argument against AI that cannot be logically applied to other art as well.
If you willingly misinterpret the point, yeah.
It’s not about it being easy, it’s that you cannot just take a bunch of art, and taking the fucking averages of it and hoping it to be anything but (at best) pretty images.
It doesn’t happen with the output of a generative model by itself, if you edit it afterwards then it can be art because someone did put at least something into it.
Still though, the base in that case is completely meaningless and you’d have to change it massively for it to be anything worthwhile, just like a bonsai requires a lot of effort to be turned from a regular tree to art.
Nah this is still a stupid point.
LLMs are not a writing tool at all, it’s like saying it’s classist to not be able to afford a ghostwriter.