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/)G

galanthus

@ galanthus @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
192
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • Hot take coming through

    Jump

  • Honestly, I undefstand why he might have wanted to kill that CEO, but he is still a murderer, so the last thing that anyone should do is to support him and his murder. This betrays a lack of morality.

  • I keep saying that, but y'all keep hatin'

    Jump

  • I usually do elaborate on my points, but you said you were tired of reductive statements, so I thought it would be funny if I made one.

  • I keep saying that, but y'all keep hatin'

    Jump

  • I did provide some insight, by responding to someone that replied to my comment. Feel free to read it.

  • I keep saying that, but y'all keep hatin'

    Jump

  • No, I am not. AI art is "art" made by AI, and I would say nothing more. The point of it is to minimise the necessity for humans to make creative decisions, but that is what art is, essentially, so I can hardly call it art.

    There is no medium that tries to eliminate itself as a medium like AI. Whatever medium you pick, it is accepted that it will be reflected in the finished product, that is the point of a medium. But AI "works" only have a distinct look by accident, as AI is a program that imitates already existing things, insofar as the product is distinct from actual art, it fails, so the idea of AI as a medium is paradoxical.

    For that reason, I believe it ultimately to be a waste of time. If your end goal is to make something indistinguishable from what already exists, you will only produce an inferior version.

    But to answer your question, no, AI can be used as a medium for art, but only in a meta sense in which both it, and what it produces, are part of the picture. Otherwise, I would say, AI art is not art.

  • I keep saying that, but y'all keep hatin'

    Jump

  • There is no such thing as AI art.

  • Death to Nickels

    Jump

  • Dying of dysentery is not a tradition, genius.

  • Death to Nickels

    Jump

  • I can think of a president far more repulsive than any king.

    Putting kings on coins is a very old tradition, originating in Rome. Culture is important.

  • Always guard against living in the world of fantasy rather than undeniable facts

    Jump

  • Moral objectivism and Rand's objectivism are two completely different things.

    Rand's philosophy is opposed to traditional morality.

  • Death to Nickels

    Jump

  • This would be great. I love coins.

    But your coins don't even have a face of a king and cool latin words on them, so they aren't quite as great as I'd like.

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • They feel like it's wrong so it needs to be illegal.

    They believe it to be immoral, so they want it to be illegal, yes. Is that not how people usually decide what should be legal and what shouldn't?

    Also, it seems disingenuous to say that

    No amount of death or suffering of real live people is as important as their idea of a person.

    I would say one can be opposed to abortions, and still care about other people. Clearly.

    The state already regulates which practices may or may not be performed by doctors. This is hardly different.

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • I would say people with principled political views are in the minority, whether they are on the left or on the right. Most people just parrot what everyone else and the politicians say. People don't like to think about these matters too deeply and vague emotions can be used(by politicians) in many ways.

    In any case, which extreme positions are you referring to specifically? Or rather, which positions are extreme and integral to their programme?

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • I assumed you meant the competent republican will be so successful, the party will win the next election and the dems will not be able to compete. So you would rather they fail and let you win.

    But now I realise that you actually implied they will rig the elections, which makes me think you are dramatising even more, since I doubt that will happen.

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • Maybe you are right, but I would not underestimate how quickly things can change. The did change quickly with Trump, did they not?

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • Why would they not support him? A sizeable portion of their base love the guy. He has a lot of power.

    And why would the situation not change if a more sensible person assumed leadership of the party? Things can change rather quickly, and if his term goes badly I doubt the conservative establishment will appreciate another idiot nominee with a god complex.

    The democrats nominated a barely functioning senile man that can't string a sentence together for president twice. That does not mean that every single nominee that comes after is going to have dementia, does it?

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • Being more competent than Trump is hardly remarkable.

    I believe you are being unfair to republicans. I understand the desire to caricature the other side, but this is unbecoming of Boddhisatva.

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • Would you rather not have a competent government? You are dramatising a bit I believe.

  • Billionaires are turning on Trump | CNN Business

    Jump

  • Maybe the next Republican will be more sensible.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I read it as "robot that can eat orgasms for fuel. My version is better.

  • Heaven on earth = Communism

    Jump

  • If only these nonreligious people recognised how little they know about religion.

    I might have changed my views on certain things after coming to the fediverse, and now I see that Lemmy is an echochamber. It seems like right wing and even moderate people just stayed on twitter and "truth social", which are echochambers as well, especially the latter, clearly, and I end up arguing with everyone all the time.