fear

Man people are judgy as hell. I like to think that I’d notice and stop too, but at 11pm, tired in the middle of nowhere with no street lights? How many of us know 100% that we would have stopped in time? It’s understandable how this happened.

After an entire decade of directing people to drive off a goddamn bridge, Google should apologize to the family and settle. It’s shameful. Get a better update team if you’re going to provide a mapping service.

Pretty sure you could substitute “autism” with any topic at all and the point would be accurate.

True, but with how secretive North Korea is, it’s difficult to get accurate cultural news directly from the source.

Send in the great musician!

Your assessment seems spot on to me. I’m connecting some projected dots to late stage capitalism. Perhaps the AIs will trickle down and such if we hold off on regulations.

Of course it’s possible for the government to impose regulations without sticking their face in and motorboating the AI’s contents. Google, Microsoft et al. would love to prevent this from happening because they actually do have their faces in there.

This is such an important distinction. Current AI is incapable of wanting to cause any of that harm, yet it’s already happening. The danger won’t be skynet, it will be and always has been human greed and ignorance.

Hmm, this makes me think of the tradition on certain parts of the internet where people publicly announce the name and crime of this convicted rapist. They’ll explain where he’s currently living, the name he’s trying to go by, and bars he was seen at. This activity seems to stem from the outrage at the excessive leniency he was shown by the judge, although could also be protecting other potential victims.

I wonder if this kind of vigilante doxxing would fall under the scope of such a law, especially when his name is already in so many publications.

Stop closing in on me!

First the Streisand effect led to her home. Now it leads to her entire discography. Poor Barbara Streisand.

When you have all that money and fame to insulate you, self-preservation is no longer a concern.

why do the author’s politics make a difference?

In this case it makes a difference because there has been an alarming increase in harmful lies made by the far right. This is a purposeful spread of misinformation that many people hesitate to get involved with in any way, and for good reason.

I do not trust the creator of Brave to be aligned with the far right and to still be guided by ethical conduct that I can trust. If you align yourself with people who lie and put others in danger for profit and control, you’re condoning such behavior and may be capable of it yourself.

To be fair, it appears that by definition anyone who disagrees with them might have a hard time getting through.

skeptical of social change, instead tending to support the status quo

A more polite way of saying they’re firmly stuck in their ways, unwilling to accept a different perspective.

Yeah, I took a look at the code they used in the article that might help someone generate functional attacks. A rando experimenting without permission would likely get banned from the service.

I just tried this on ChatGPT, it doesn’t work.

Most people seem to be trying to pass off AI creations as their own judging by the exponential flood of AI trash websites, videos, books, news, etc. I’ve encountered people delusional enough to believe it really is their own artwork because they supplied the text prompt to Stable Diffusion. There’s a long way to go before we see transparency.

I wouldn’t even know how to begin holding people to transparency here. It’s nice that it tends to be obvious when something is AI generated, but I’m sure the clock is ticking to the day no one can tell the difference.

but there’s guys out there

Guys, you say? Don’t worry, it’s just major publications like National Geographic firing off all their writers, tech companies downsizing in the hopes that ChatGPT will code for free, a plague of nonsensical AI written books flooding the market under legitimate authors’ names, and all of Hollywood hoping their writers will work for pennies out of desperation for food and shelter.

It doesn’t matter that ChatGPT constantly gives wrong answers and has about as much personality as a bran muffin. With the dawn of AI, us humans don’t need humans anymore.

It’s so ironic because we even have an inferno planet next door with a runaway greenhouse effect that everyone can use as an example. With an average surface temperature of 464 degrees, Venus got through to me as a small child. But knowing the type of ignorant person we’re talking about, Venus would just be held as further “proof” that Earth’s climate change isn’t caused by human activity.

I agree there were so many screw-ups in the response, especially in the early days. China insisting upon secrecy until it spread across the globe, the WHO’s confusing statements on the efficacy of masks in order to preserve supplies for the front lines, the ridiculous pro-masker vs anti-masker mentality, the Trump fiasco where he suggested doctors use lemon fresh Lysol or whatever the hell he was on about to disinfect people’s lungs as if he has a goddamed clue, the alt-right losing their minds over a dangerous vaccine with Bill Gates computer chips in it, etc.

But remember CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer? Scientists were like “Hey, guys. There’s a hole here. We need to stop using this crap or we dead.” And everyone banded together and stopped using CFCs, and the hole in the ozone layer closed happily ever after. Sometimes we can actually do it right. I don’t know, maybe it’ll take a crisis like losing Florida to the ocean for Americans to collectively give a shit again and start doing things right. Or maybe we’ll all die before we get a chance to see that happen.

If they want digital artwork, then it’s safe to say they accept the typical digital tools and brushes, even if some of those could technically be using algorithms some would describe as rudimentary AI. An artist would have to be purposely obtuse not to understand the difference between the clone brush and telling Bing to draw them a dwarf.

Okay, I get your point now. If all artists had your stance and felt this hobbled them, then I’d understand thinking Hasbro’s decision is wrong. But not every artist agrees with you. This is reminiscent of the argument between digital and physical art, with digital artist’s struggle to be seen as viable against oil painters and other physical media artists. Except digital isn’t any better or worse, they’re simply different mediums. You could argue pros and cons for both types, but in the end everyone is entitled to the medium they prefer. This includes AI assisted artwork. If someone prefers digital art but wants no AI influence, that’s up to them since art is entirely subjective.

This is a perfectly valid direction for Hasbro to want to take, and they’re the ones who get to make the call. Not every artist feels hobbled by being barred from AI tools, some artists prefer to avoid AI entirely. There are plenty of people who would happily accept these jobs.