I was not ready for this 😂

I’m afraid that we seen to disagree on who an artist is and what is a valid moral trade off.

Is it really the democratization of art? Or the commodification of art?

Art has, with the exception of extraordinary circumstances, always been democratic. You could at any point pick up a pencil and draw.

Ai has funneled that skill, critically through theft, into a commodified product, the ai model. Through with they can make huge profits.

The machine does the art. And, even when run on your local machine the model was almost certainly trained on expensive machines through means you could not personally replicate.

I find it alarming that people are so willing to celebrate this. It’s like throwing a party that you can buy bottled Nestle water at the grocery store which was taken by immoral means. It’s nice for you, but ultimately just further consolation of power away from individuals.

Sorry, I might have went a bit ham on you there, it was late at night. I think I might have been rude

1. Theft does not depend on a legal definition.

Intellectual property theft used to be legal, but protections were eventually put in place to protect the industry of art. (I’m not a staunch defender if the laws as they are, and I belive it actually, in many cases, stifles creativity.)

I bring up the law not recognizing machine generated art only to dismiss the idea that the legal system agrees wholeheartedly with the stance that AI art is defensibly sold on the free market.

2. There is no evidence to suggest AI think like a human / It hardly matters that AI can be creative.

A) To suggest a machine neutral network “thinks like a human” is like suggesting a humanoid robot “runs like a human.” It’s true in an incredibly broad sense, but carries so little meaning with it.

Yes, ai models use advanced, statistical multiplexing of parameters, which can metaphorically be compared to neurons, but only metaphorically. It’s just vaguely similar. Inspired by, perhaps.

B) It hardly matters if AI can create art. It hardly even matters if they did it in exactly the way humans do.

Because the operator doesn’t have the moral or ethical right to sell it in either case.

If the AI is just a stocastic parrot, then it is a machine of theft leveraged by the operator to steal intellectual labor.

If the AI is creative in the same way as a person, then it is a slave.

I’m not actually against AI art, but I am against selling it, and I respect artists for trying to protect their industry. It’s sad to see an entire industry of workers get replaced by machines, and doubly sad to see that those machines are made possible by the theft of their work. It’s like if the automatic loom had been assembled out of centuries of collected fabrics. Each worker non consensually, unknowingly, contributing to the near total destruction of their livelihood. There is hardly a comparison which captures the perversion of it.

Counterpoints:

Artists also draw distinctions between inspiration and ripping off.

The legality of an act has no bearing on its ethics or morality.

The law does not protect machine generated art.

Machine learning models almost universally utilize training data which was illegally scraped off the Internet (See meta’s recent book piracy incident).

Uncritically conflating machine generated art with actual human inspiration, while career artist generally lambast the idea, is not exactly a reasonable stance to state so matter if factly.

It’s also a tacit admission that the machine is doing the inspiration, not the operator. The machine which is only made possible by the massive theft of intellectual property.

The operator contributes no inspiration. They only provide their whims and fancy with which the machine creates art through mechanisms you almost assuredly don’t understand. The operator is no more an artist than a commissioner of a painting. Except their hired artist is a bastard intelligence made by theft.

And here they are, selling it for thousands.

Yes, sorry, where I live it’s pretty normal for cars to be diesel powered. What I meant by my comparison was that a train, when measured uncritically, uses more energy to run than a car due to it’s size and behavior, but that when compared fairly, the train has obvious gains and tradeoffs.

Deepseek as a 600b model is more efficient than the 400b llama model (a more fair size comparison), because it’s a mixed experts model with less active parameters, and when run in the R1 reasoning configuration, it is probably still more efficient than a dense model of comparable intelligence.

Yeah, I was thinking diesel powered trains

This article is comparing apples to oranges here. The deepseek R1 model is a mixture of experts, reasoning model with 600 billion parameters, and the meta model is a dense 70 billion parameter model without reasoning which preforms much worse.

They should be comparing deepseek to reasoning models such as openai’s O1. They are comparable with results, but O1 cost significantly more to run. It’s impossible to know how much energy it uses because it’s a closed source model and openai doesn’t publish that information, but they charge a lot for it on their API.

Tldr: It’s a bad faith comparison. Like comparing a train to a car and complaining about how much more diesel the train used on a 3 mile trip between stations.

👏 where 👏 is 👏 his 👏 dick 👏 and 👏 prostate 👏

http://archive.today/2025.01.31-010309/https://www.theverge.com/command-line-newsletter/603754/mark-zuckerberg-tells-employees-to-buckle-up-in-leaked-all-hands-meeting

Does system 76 do a bad job? I’ve looked at their prices, which are high, but haven’t heard anything bad about them.

Here is my face, sir.

Get a bidet, friend

Not gonna lie, that looks fun as hell to play on

This is not a service I personally use, but I’ve thought about it: services like mysudo let you select and create new phone numbers. https://anonyome.com/individuals/mysudo-plans/

In your situation I might research and select a service like this. Then create a few disposable numbers. Give one to your trusted friends and family, another to employers and banks, etc, and the third to anyone else you need to contact.

Once you’ve transitioned everything important to the new numbers, get yourself a new phone number, and don’t give it to anyone. Maybe just your parents, for emergencies.

This has 2 downsides and 2 big advantages I can see.

Cons:

1, it cost you monthly. I think 3 numbers from mysudo is like $5 a month

2, it’s a pain to transition folks to your new number.

Pros:

1, if your stalker finds one of your new numbers, it’s easier to change them.

2, you can narrow down who it might be. Like, if you have a number dedicated to work contacts and the stalker starts texting it, you know they either are a coworker or got it from a coworker.

I think Google voice can also give you some free numbers, so look into that. Good luck!

I mean no offense, but it sounds like you have poorly developed social skills. I used to as well.

You could try reframing it in your mind:

It’s not faking, it’s practice.

If you pick up an instrument for the first time to practice, you will sound terrible, and possibly be discouraged, but if you practice for hundreds of hours you’ll be able to play it for real.

Babies and children aren’t born knowing how to express interest or sympathize. You certainly weren’t. Children have to learn how to do this. It is possible that you need to practice if you want to build intimate relationships. There is no shortcut to this.

(35, he/him) This is how I met my first girlfriend, in reverse. I was lonely and had mentally committed to making a friend in a manic episode. I saw her on a bench reading and asked if I could sit next to her. I had a book with me too, and began to read. Then, I asked what she was reading. We became friends, and later dated for 2.5 years.

I’ve spent a lot of time wandering around hoping people would talk to me. I used to feel like it was worthless, because 95% of the time no one will talk to you, but those odds aren’t so bad in hindsight. Go into public 100 times a year and you’ll have 5 decent shots at making a friend. Make one friend a year, and you’ll probably have more social opportunities than you want to deal with.

I’ve met people randomly in public like this perhaps 6 times.

There are other factors other than randomness:

1. I’m very friendly to people. I like to ask questions once a conversation gets going, and I get animated on just about any topic. I talk to myself a lot, so even when I’m not exposed to people I’m practiced, in a way.

2. There is usually an activity involved. Reading a book together, drawing on an airplane, posting art on a blog, taking classes together, being at the same work event, hiding in the same hard to find corner of the library. These are all situations from my life, and they typically involve a shared activity, or a creative outlet. This is probably why people recommend joining clubs / going to bars, advice I’ve never taken, but I see the reasoning.

I don’t mean to project that my social life is great! I’ve been terribly lonely during much of it, and these experiences I’m describing took place over several years. However, if I could boil down my successes, I’d say they cultivating a curiousty in others and publically engaging in my hobbies has been the best way to make friends (and occasionally lovers).

Just as the guy dodging the moose, his little dog is jumping to attack it. Little dogs are hardcore

Turns out that eliminating 70% of all viable workers from employability creates job security for boring, cis men.

Exposure to violence is bad. Fostering a society where violence is commonplace, bad. Exporting violence to places and people unseen, all bad.

but I’m not really sure that illegal or extra-judicial killings are always wrong. Sometimes evil people are protected or above the law. If a Russian citizen shot Vladimir Putin dead tomorrow, I’d be happy with it. I’d be happy to see a sandy hook parent kill Alex Jones, if they could do it without consequence.

It’s not that I believe that murder should be legal, Nor do I believe in capital punishment. Institutional violence is bad for the reasons I listed earlier. But, a lone gunman shooting an evil man is not institutionalized violence.