I use chapstick to heal acne scars, since all it actually does for lips is make them worse at retaining moisture

Twitch also has them now for how many of someone’s consecutive streams you watch

I didn’t know this was a feature. There wouldn’t happen to be a way to do this but only for the subscription tab? Because I want to stay updated on politics but specifically want my subscriptions to be sanitized of them for when I need a break from thinking about the state of the world for awhile

Peanut butter and spinach sandwich. Not too much spinach though

Ignoring the fact you havent made any factual arguments, would it be rude to point out your comment history in turn?

Even basic LLMs can take in context of your entire conversation history. Not that a braindead luddite would actually know anything about AI.

But ya know, keep being an insufferable cunt because people use a computer program you don’t like, like the fucking loser you are.

Yup, sure sounds like you have a master in AI and robotics when you have to harass people & call them insufferable cunts for disagreeing with the ethics behind what you apparently study. Obviously you’re definitely not morally grandstanding in the slightest.

Hope lying on the internet works out for you tho ✌️

Except that using art for training data isn’t remotely the same.e as trying to claim ownership of it. So this is a nonsense comparison as well. You’re the one relying on strawman arguments here.

So they’re profiting off of the works of others with no credit given, no financial compensation offered and no consent from the actual artists. What would you call that if not theft?

Its more accurate to compare it to say, someone watching a bunch of studio Ghibli films then using that as reference to draw their own ghibli styled art… which people do all the time and you guys don’t get mad at them for that.

Which is because they’re using a reference to create their own art. I’m not sure how you think machine learning works but I can tell you there is no actual “learning” involved. What it produces is a direct result of the data (stolen work) it’s trained on. If you genuinely think a machine is capable of producing original art you’re attributing human traits to AI in a way that shows you fundamentally misunderstand the capabilities of image generation models as well as all current AI.

I don’t use that opinion to go on a moral crusade.

Meanwhile two comments ago…

The same people saying shit like “if buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing” are calling training AI on publically available data “stealing”

If I was wrong on any topic I’d love to be enlightened as to why but your arguments so far have boiled down to insults, strawmans and “no, you’re actually doing the thing that you called me out for doing!” At the point that’s what you have to result to in order to “win” a debate I would be heavily considering if the opposing party has a point instead of doubling down on the third grade argument tactics. 👍 Have a lovely day

It’s the same logic as saying someone tracing another persons art and passing it off as their own to make money is theft because that’s essentially what they’re doing. Except they’re scraping the internet in order to feed millions of artists’ works without their consent to a machine that approximates what “art” is supposed to look like.

This is the same braindead logic as people saying downloading someone else’s NFT is stealing.

If someone stole an artist’s work and passed it off as an NFT as has happened many times that’s also an example of theft. I know that’s not the strawman you’re presenting but that is the actual NFT equivalent of what we’re discussing. But yes, conflate it with downloading an image so you can call me braindead instead of formulating an argument.

It’s fine if you personally enjoy slop, there’s plenty of it out there now. But if you’re gonna try to morally grandstand about it you may as well just say you don’t think artists deserve to be paid for their own work and be done with it.

Because obviously pirating games & shows for personal use does the same amount of harm as a corporate entity stealing the work of hundreds of thousands of writers and artists in order to turn a profit

Seriously, I’m here to look at artists’ work, not computer generated slop

I feel you tbh but be aware these aren’t normal or mentally healthy thoughts to be having even when things are this fucked

I don’t think it’s as much of an unpopular opinion as it is just a thing that happens. If the Sims community has taught me anything, diehard fans of a franchise will keep shelling out hundreds of dollars for new content even if it’s overpriced dogshit

Both, I’m sure I could make a new account if I wanted but I don’t want to contribute to their dumpster fire of a website anymore anyway

With the way they’re handling physical copies now I won’t be buying them at all, I prefer to own the games I pay for

I’m hesitant to buy one because weirdly enough he seems to be claustrophobic but I might try.

Every single comment thread on anything that reaches r/all quickly devolving into the most unfunny and unoriginal jokes and/or references. Regardless of how grim/serious the original post was.

The Olive Garden waiter never heard the cue to stop so I suffocate on the fine powdery goodness

Reading the responses of the women in the comic you seriously think this situation isnt a metaphor for sexual assault?

In your other thread of replies to me you’re stating that it is but we’re supposed to disagree with them. I’m not sure why you feel the need to defend her so strongly that you’re simultaneously making 2 conflicting arguments and completely ignoring the other behavior I mentioned but I’m not really interested in continuing this discussion with you because I’ve presented the facts and it’s clear you’re personally unwilling to consider that this comic was made in bad faith

I don’t want to spam the comments section by copy and pasting the same message twice, but someone else made a similar point so I’ll link my response

https://lemmy.world/comment/15436914

Yes, the comic is satire. The satire is “men getting treated the way female r*pe victims get treated”. Implying that male sexual assault doesn’t happen or that when it does, people actually believe them, when in reality men who are victims of this often just don’t speak up at all because when they are, they’re either not believed, called “gay” for not enjoying it, or it ends up reported with a headline like “female teacher has sex with male student”.

The fact she posted this comic on men’s mental health awareness day and proceeded to engage in arguments with male victims of SA in the comments - who were then banned without a chance to appeal - as well as her past of seeking out her critics to argue with even in other subreddits heavily indicates that this was inflammatory on purpose.

…did you respond to the wrong person or are you just making shit up to be mad at because you don’t have an argument?