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/)D
Posts
4
Comments
1698
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I loved it for the first 3 seasons. Then they turn it into the usual couples sitcom and lost all its appeal.

    I liked the dynamic of having all main characters "fail" in life. Penny failed as an actress, Leonard failed in dating Penny, Howard failed as a playboy, Raj failed talking to women and Sheldon failed at social integration. They were all adorable losers that had fun while losing. For me it kinda was giving a lot of hope, like you don't have to succeed in life to have a good time.

    Then they made them all winners, they all became rich, and achieve all their goals. And all hope was lost. And the message was "you better succeed in life" which was depressing.

  • If you want it to go unhinged try to get an uncensored llm. Dans PersonalityEngine by bartowski is my current favorite.

  • Solo roleplay. You can make a character and interact. Generate fake conversations etc.

    With generative images you can create custom backgrounds, portraits and landscapes instead of having to lookup for them or doing it yourself.

    You can also do some interactive story telling that it's kind of fun.

    Generating quick test questions over a certain topic. It's another use case I've seen it being quite good at.

  • Yes, for starters the definition of art is vague and subjective.

    But over most definitions a meme could fit it.

    As a rule of thumb I don't really worry about what's art and what's not.

  • When this game is released the setting is going to be ancient history.

  • To be fair it's about the new UK nanny dictatorship law.

    In theory lemmy should do the same and the UK government could sue and block access of any lemmy instance not following their ludicrous laws.

  • Can you stop insulting people you don't agree with? Thanks. I'll do myself a favor and just block you.

  • My guess is some android shenanigans. They go to great lengths to track you.

    People called me crazy when I said that the phone was listening through the microphone to track your conversations, until they actually admitted they were doing precisely that.

    Android may be doing whatever to track you.

  • Did you notice that lately it's happen more frequently?

    These things happens to me too, and the frequency have measurably increase in this last year.

  • All the personal attacks were completely out of place. So that person is out of the debate for me.

    You were polite so I will answer to you.

    First. Pay per access is no-go. Art is publicly release, pay or not pay access for things that are costless to copy is unrestricted. This already happens, piracy exist and cannot made go away. It's just its legalization.

    Second. Once pay per access is abolished. It's more important to focus in pay for work or pay for release. Focusing more on making the artist a person who is being patronize for doing their art rather than a salesperson.

    Once we have this idea of patronizing, instead of private labels we could focus more on cooperative labels, taking out investors and useless middlemen. People could paid for some artist or some label (which will be exclusively conformed by artist) in order for them to keep making their thing. Some labels could be actually public labels, this already exist to some degree when some state pays for art to be made, just expanding it.

    Now that we changed the model in a model were people give their money before they get to see the final product we should put some protections in place to avoid scams and then we are golden.

    It's not so complicated really. Many systems already exist. The history is the same as with everything else capitalism and rich capitalists are in a dominant position so they make any change for the better harder.

  • I think you are arguing against an imaginary group of people here.

  • So is a world without murder. That doesn't mean that we should defend murderers doesn't it?

    A world where gay people had equal rights surely was an utopia on the year 1800s, look how far have we come. Thanks to people that though that a better word is, indeed, possible.

    Why wouldn't we strive for a better way of doing things? Why defend faulty systems that we know they are bad just because those are the systems currently in place?

    I do believe we can be better.

    And if not... Piracy it is.

  • Any system to evaluate compensation would be better than the actual one, which is a completely mess that does not properly compensate artists for their work.

    Currently marketing, frontstore presence and market dominance is far more relevant on a particular artist income than their craft.

    Any system that actually would think about what people think about a particular craft, how much time and effort got put into it, how much it was enjoyed, etc, would be better. Currently is just about who can make more sales and get more ad money, the art is secondary and I'm being generous.

  • Because you will be paid for it?

    In the current world I could torrent your music and you'll be "losing money" and will end up investing more work in anti-piracy and advertisement than in making good music.

    If instead you would be paid for the making of the music regardless of how many copies of a digital file you sold by a better system that's not based on private property and the means of capitalism, it would mean that you could 100% focus on making music and everyone could enjoy the things you made. You couldn't care less if I torrent your music in this new world. Hell, music would probably be mainly distributed by torrenting.

    Everyone will be happy, except investors and people thriving of this inefficient and unfair system.

    Meanwhile, I'll be seeding.

  • My eternal sense of wonder. Thinking if any given picture of his has or has not been altered to make his face smaller. And the amusing conclusion that I cannot really tell.

  • I do believe that.

    Intellectual property leads to all kind of unfairness. It should be normalized that artist would be paid for the work done, nor for property ownership.

    This adds to some other believes about people shouldn't be paid just for "property ownership".

    And once the art is done and released is part of human race, that does include terrible human beings, but it also includes absolutely everyone else.

    Some other argument for this... For instance, being an artist is one of the jobs with biggest pay disparity, from the poorest of them all to some of the richest. That's a normal output of basing income on property ownership, things snowball once you have enough property.

    I don't think there's a way to make private property (physical or intelectual) work in a fair economy. And remember, private property is not the same as personal property, just in case.

    I do think the world of art would get much better and more diverse if we got rid of property as a way to measure revenue and put work in the center as a way to measure how much we should pay each artist.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I can't wait for what comes first. The claudication and predictable extended support or the wave of malware paralyzing half the world over unsecured devices.

  • Doesn't look like anything to me.