A bear won’t try to convince you that you weren’t really assaulted and accuse you of just wanting attention
He/Him Jack of all trades, master of none
A bear won’t try to convince you that you weren’t really assaulted and accuse you of just wanting attention
Which version was that, and is it still possible to swap to it?
Edit: by the power of actually researching it instead of bothering someone else, I found it. They were bought by an analytics company in July of 2022, and the last full release version of the app before that on APK mirror was 7.0.57
The way I see it, unless I’m at risk of having personally identifiable information leaked, ad companies can waste all the money they want on me. I don’t see anything they make anyway.
I can answer that! Tasker can’t turn bluetooth off anymore! That’s a feature, right?
deleted by creator
When art is commissioned, art is produced. If no human produced it, an ai did. If ai cannot produce art, then a human must have.
Right, so this is what I mean when I say that charitable interpretation is dead. Taking my earlier assertion that AI generated art isn’t real art, along with my assertion that providing a prompt to an AI is essentially equivalent to providing a description to a human artist for a commission, should not have read as an argument for or against AI generated art being real art. Taking those statements together, the only reasonable conclusion you can make about my position is that prompt engineers aren’t artists.
I suppose I don’t understand why engineering a prompt can’t count as an artistic skill, nor why selecting from a number of generated outputs can’t (albeit to probably a much lower degree). At what point does a patron making a commission become a collaborator?
Never. It’s not an artistic skill in the same way that providing a description to an actual artist is not an artistic skill, which was the point of that paragraph. They become a collaborator the moment they make changes to the work, and the level to which they can say they’re an artist depends on what changes they make, and how well they make them.
There’s a couple of orthogonal arguments here, and I’m going to try to address them both: are you an artist if you use AI generated art, and why do I hate AI generated art?
Telling a machine “car, sedan, neon lights, raining, shining asphalt, night time, city lights” is not creating art. To me, it’s equivalent to commissioning art. If I pay someone $25 to draw my D&D character, then I am not an artist, I’ve simply hired one to draw what I wanted to see. Now, if I make any meaningful changes to that artwork, I could be considered an artist. For example, if I commissioned someone else to do the line work, and then I fill in the colors, we’ve both made the artwork. Of course, this can be stretched to an extreme that challenges my descriptivism. If I put a single black pixel on the Mona Lisa, can I say I collaborated on the output? Technically, yes, but I can’t take credit for anything other than putting a black pixel on it. Similarly, I feel that prompt engineers can’t take any credit for the pictures that AI produces past the prompt that they provided and whatever post-processing they do.
As for why I hate AI art, I just hate effortless slop. It’s the exact same thing as YouTube shorts comprised of Family Guy clips and slime. I have a hard time really communicating this feeling to other people, but I know many other people feel the same way. Even aside from the ethical concerns of stealing people’s artwork to train image generators, we live in a capitalist society, and automating things like art generation and youtube shorts uploads harms the people who actually produce those things in the first place.
I love it when people get hyper defensive about this for no reason at all. Aesthetically, AI art is obviously better than a child’s scribbles, but the problem is that AI art is pure aesthetic, with no meaning behind it at all, and if you engage with art purely for the aesthetic, then you fundamentally miss the point of it. AI can’t mean anything when it produces art. It just spits out a series of 1s and 0s based on whatever nonsense you shout into it.
It doesn’t matter how many hours you spend working on a piece, if you use AI (Edit to clarify: if you use AI to generate the art in its entirety), then the AI made the art. An AI cannot answer questions about artistic decisions it made, because it made no decisions. It’s worse than tracing—at least an amateur artist can answer why they decided to copy another artist’s work.
Because charitable interpretation is dead, I have to clarify. I’m not saying that there is no valid use case AI generated art, nor am I saying that all human-made art is good. All I’m saying is that human-made art can have meaning behind it, while AI art cannot. It’s incapable of having meaning, so it isn’t really art.
You can’t just say “excellent question” when someone asks you to clarify your point lmfao
“They’re trying to force our kids to get vaccines so they can manipulate them with 5g wifi”
How could they manipulate your kids with 5g signals?
“That’s a good question innit”
In my case it’s just the same as hate for AI generated slop
Moya is cooler than the rest of those ships combined
She doesn’t need to frell herself, she already bad a baby
And some douchebag could come in and say “um, actually, it’s always going to be limited because the internet speed isn’t infinite” as if the 3TB my mobile data is capable of downloading at full speed is at all comparable to the 0.05TB I can get after they rate limit me
You are using more than a typical cell phone user
But it still costs the ISP effectively nothing to send those 1s and 0s. This is like complaining about someone having a bunch of fans on because they’re using more air than the average person.
I still feel like I should be able to sue AT&T for claiming my hotspot is “unlimited,” but after 15 gb it drops to double digit kbps. Seems like that’s a pretty hard limit
Alabama is so much farther south than northern California. How far south is it? Does Kansas fit in the range?
I’ve seen the former part of that sentiment on here, but I haven’t seen anyone use it as justification to go to war
More like “we are the baddies, but the incredibly wealthy own the country and they want war, and none of us have to balls to start lopping off heads”
The more I watch Ghost In The Shell, the more I think “man the stuff Section 9 does is actually pretty awful, it’s a good thing they’re the good guys”
I wish the people doing Section 9 shit were the good guys in real life. They don’t even have any hot cyborgs
Your children can inherit your GOG library. Buy DRM free!
Or just pirate lmao