I mean…;
Benjamin Schreiber was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison in 1996, after clubbing a man to death with the handle of a pickaxe and leaving his body outside a trailer. Schreiber had conspired with the man’s girlfriend to murder him.
He took away someone else’s body and life first.
You make it sound like China was meant to pay those tariffs. It’s Americans who pay. China doesn’t give a fuck.
Right. Like the motive isn’t fucking obvious.
Oh hell yes they will!
People used to believe that leeches could suck the illness out of you. There’s always been someone selling bullshit.
If you mean specifically the outward appearance to a general audience, the term “Keeping up with the Joneses” has been around for ~110 years ( https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2017/01/keeping-up-with-the-joneses.html ).
Squirrels.
Grew up in Chicago, currently in Phoenix. I miss squirrels.
All the lizards are pretty cool though. They’re like desert squirrels.
I’ve been using a private domain for literally 100% of my logins for decades. Refuse to use SSO. Never had a service tell me that my email was invalid.
I’ve known my best friend for 20.5 years. We’re getting married in March (close to the 21 year mark).
Please swallow the entire galaxy… Just let this shit end already.
Because no one who can do anything about it gives a shit.
Why the fuck would you pause it? They should lock an actual gag around his mouth and leave it there.
Fuuuck.
It seems like just yesterday I was listening to Dana’s comedy bits about Dex as a ~5 year old.
Looks like Carmen SanDiego’s henchmen are at it again
It was a hypothetical, I was just using myself as an example. Here’s one that’s not hypothetical:
I’m already a practiced in 3D modelling, UV unwrapping, texturing, lightning, rendering, compositing, etc. I could recreate a painting, pixel for pixel, in 3D space.
If I just hit render, is that my art now? It took a lot of research to learn how to do this, I should be able to make money on that effort, right?
I can do that millions of times and get the same result. I can set it on a loop and get as many as I want. It’s the same as copying the first render’s file, it just takes longer.
Now I decide to change the camera angle. Almost the entire image is technically different now, but the composition is the same. The colors, the subjects, relative placement in the scene, all the same, but it’s not really the same image anymore. Is it mine yet?
I can set the camera to a random X,Y,Z position, and have it point at a random object in the scene (so it never points off into blank space). Are those images mine? It’s never the same twice, but it still has the original artist’s style of subjects and lighting. I can even randomize each subjects position, size, hue, direction, add a modifier that distorts them to be wobbly or cubic… I can start generating random objects and throwing them in too, let’s call those “hallucinations”, thats a fun word…
At what specific point in this madness does the imagery go from someone else’s work to mine?
I absolutely can generate millions of unique images all day. Without using machine learning, based on work I recreated with my own human hands, and code I write uniquely from my experience and abilities. None of the work - artistically - is mine. I made no decisions on composition, style, meaning, mood, color theory, etc.
You may want to try to write these questions off, but I can tell you with certainty that other artists won’t.
You can prompt an image genrater to just spit out the original art it trained on.
Imagine I had been classically trained as a painter. I study works from various artists. I become so familiar with those works - and skilled as a renderer of art in my own right - that I can reproduce, say, the Mona Lisa from memory with exacting accuracy. Should I be allowed to claim it as my art? Sign my name to it? Sell it as my own?
Now lets say we compare the original and my work at the micron level. I’m human, there’s no way I can match the original stroke for stroke, bristle to bristle. However small, there are differences. When does the work become transformative?
Let’s switch to an image generator. I ask for a picture of a smiling woman, renaissance style. The model happens to be biased to DaVinci, and it spits out almost exactly the same work as the Mona Lisa. Let’s say as a prompt engineer, I’ve never heard of or seen the Mona Lisa. I take the image, decide “meh, good enough for what I need right now”, and use it in some commercial product (say, a t-shirt). Should I be able to do that? What if it’s not the Mona Lisa, it’s a work from a living artist?
What if it’s not an image? Say I tell some model to make a song and it accidentally produces Greenday’s Basketcase (which itself is basically just a modified Pachelbel’s Canon), can I put that on a record and sell it? Who’s responsibility is it to make sure that a model’s output is unique or transformative? Shit, look at all the legal cases where musicians are suing other musicians because the chord progression is similar in two songs; What happens when it’s exactly the same because the prompt engineer for a music generation model isn’t paying attention?
You might have noticed that I haven’t referred to this technology as AI. That’s because it’s not. It’s Machine Learning. It has no intelligence. It neither seeks to create beautiful, original art, nor does it intend to rip someone off. It has no plans, no aspirations, no context, no whims. It’s a parrot, spitting out copies of things we ask it for. In general, these outputs are mixtures of various things, but sometimes they aren’t. They just output some of the training data, because that’s the output that - statically - was the best match for the prompt.
As an artist myself, I don’t fear machine learned models. I fear that these greedy fuckin’ companies will warehouse any and every bit of data they can get their hands on, train their models on other people’s work, never pay them a dime, and rip off the essence of their art without any regard for what will happen to the original artists after some jackass execs tell all their advertising/webdesign/programming/scriptwriting/etc departments to just ask the “AI” to “design” everything.
You can already see this happening with game studios. Writers went on strike over it.
It’s been suggested that AI art created without human input cannot be receive copyrights;
https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-generated-art-cannot-receive-copyrights-us-court-says-2023-08-21/
I’ve been using Clevo laptops for years. Large user base, lots of great Linux support. I just run Ubuntu, haven’t had many issues (and no critical issues).
They usually get rebranded, and I’ve gotten them through IBuyPower, Origin, and… can’t remember the other one. My most recent one was just straight up marketed as a Clevo, got it on Amazon.
You might have one or two odd issues (like having to install custom code to configure the RGB key backlights), but there are plenty of users to ask for assistance on various forums and repos.
I’ve been using nVidia cards on laptops with Ubuntu much exclusively for ~15 years . Only problem I’ve ever had was once when I accidentally uninstalled something using apt-get and it took the nvidia drivers with it (because I’m was stupid).
Your opinion is exactly what they’re aiming for. Just waiting for people to become complacent enough for them to take over without any resistance at all.
Chrome isn’t a bad option because it’s not a good browser. Their goal is to make the best browser possible so that everyone switches to it.
It’s a bad option because if everyone uses a single browser, the developer of that browser owns all decisions about how the internet is allowed to be built. That isn’t a good thing. Not when Microsoft tried to do it, and not while Google is trying to do it.
If Google takes over development of all browsing options (including the ones that depend on it’s base code, like Edge), web-based tech will stagnate due to lack of competition (and so, a lack of the need to innovate), and privacy will disappear (even more than it already has). And good luck blocking ads in a browser that doesn’t allow the addons to function.
Google has proven itself to be a company that doesn’t just kill competition, but also it’s own projects if they don’t perform the way they want. They don’t care about proper copyright protection or enforcement, they don’t care about privacy, and they don’t care about you (no corporation does).