CKnowles

23708 pts ยท November 28, 2011


You're not wrong for thinking the plot of R&J is BS. What you missed was that it's commentary on how much of real life is stupid bullshit. That's what it means to be a tragedy.

Sometimes, kids end up dead. For stupid shitty reasons. And you're helpless to stop it. You scream and cry and they're still fucking dead. You know it's coming and it doesn't help at all.

Shakespeare was retelling one of the oldest stories we know, and we still haven't come any closer to preventing these tragedies.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Suzie's my homie

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Just lay out your plan for destroying the weapons and I'll take care of the insecure middle aged white guys open carrying at the gas station. Much like drag queens and books, they aren't the ones killing people.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Semantics are for people who care more about understanding and being understood than being enjoyed.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Not only is your assessment wrong, it's irrelevant. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut-up_technique LLMs do not keep pieces of training data, nor can they reproduce them. The absurdem here is claiming that bc they use letters and were trained on things that use letters, those letters themselves were somehow stolen. There's only 26 of them. 255 if you want to be fancy.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'll wager you $20 (for real) that you reliably cannot tell the difference. Your hate does not actually affect the content, nor does it make any piece more or less exploitative. It does, however, devalue all art in its attempt to separate without distinction.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As fun as those are, that's not what this is. But I shouldn't expect anything better from something that 'just' exploits word artists and reuses passages learned in language training.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

If you manage to show me an actual difference in how humans use language, blitzing past the most sophisticated theories of mind and doctorate level understandings of language, not only will you convince me that AI aren't worth exploring, I will hail you as a God. How else could you know your own mind that well?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When a kidnapper cuts out words from magazines to write a ransom note, it's OBVIOUSLY true novel generation. I'm not assuming the machine does the same as you, you're insisting you're doing something different w/o ever actually checking if you are. Everyone who speaks does it the same way: Take words you learned, use them however feels right.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Or, put another way: You're just the latest in a long tradition of people trying to decide for all of us what *really* counts as *art*, and everything that doesn't coincide with the finance model you were born with counts as garbage. Just say you hate libraries and join the GOP.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

So when you read the class copy of Where The Red Fern Grows or paid $0.50 for a used copy of 1984, that and nothing else gave you infinite license to speak English?

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

AI works fine offline

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

How much did your high school english teacher pay an author to train you?

2 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

Which ones- The ones making art or the ones insisting we shouldn't be allowed to?

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

At first I thought it was a typo but the grammar actually makes it sound more like that pile of dogshit (right).

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

It's a dismissal, I don't think it sets any precedent.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Nah. Even if you ignore BTLE earbuds with mics and buttons, the over-the-ear side of the spectrum has active cancelling and whatnot.

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Might make you sleep with your cousin (this is a reference)

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yes, but what about the agriculture workers?

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0