Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)B
Posts
0
Comments
28
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • It's a hard thing to talk about without coming across as inflammatory, especially considering the purpose of the building. I couldn't find many other pictures of it beyond that one, but it didn't seem like it had a lot going for it beyond the fact that a building serving that purpose had been at that site for 600 years.

  • I kinda feel like the political uncertainty may not really factor in. Politically, it's possible that they may not exist once these are completed, but if they don't there isn't anyone in the government left to care.

  • It is such a shame that you have to jump through extra hoops to get a .cat domain. They could make so much money.

  • This is actually super super tricky.

    So, there's an exemption for 'Transformative' art, and while this is obviously pretty shady, it feels like there's a good chance this would qualify as transformative. Basically, you can't copy an existing photograph you don't own, but you can take an existing person and paint a new original picture of them.

    We had a big lawsuit just last year where the Supreme Court clarified the line a bit. In that case, the art was found to be not Transformative, but they did a lot to explain why, and based on that, this would be super likely to fall on the side of 'Legally Allowed'.

  • As someone who used to be a Java programmer, I can't make any sense of that statement.

  • I think we've got a bit before we have to worry about another major jump in AI and way longer for an Ultron. The ones we have now are effectively parsers for google or other existing data. I personally still don't see how we feel like we can get away with calling that AI.

    Any AI that actually creates something 'new' that I've seen still requires a tremendous amount of oversight, tweaking and guidance to produce useful results. To me, they still feel like very fancy search engines.

  • Toxic/Radioactive waste is obviously toxic and radioactive, but how bad that really is is kind of overblown especially if you compare it to the harm caused by popular existing methods like coal/etc. When adjusted based on energy produced, there's more than one study out there showing how Nuclear is significantly safer than coal by a very wide margin. Coal ash is also radioactive and coal plants have very limited requirements to prevent it from escaping to the environment.

    Even 'Radioactive Waste' really only feels scary because all of the bad stuff is condensed into a much smaller package when you adjust based on energy produced again.