If I was a hungry sea turtle, I’d just order a pizza.

If you say that I assume you either only used older services or your prompt skills are lacking.

ChatGPT 4 is really advanced and can create long coherent fluid texts (with source references). You can also ask it to write as a student or any other target and it will match writing styles quite well.

Aren’t there like cheat servers and non-cheat servers? Or is that a “gentleman’s agreement” that not everyone is playing fair with if you can’t fully block it because of mods etc?

I wanted to pedantically correct you about the a / an… but then realised you got me.

Value of art is always in the eye of the beholder. If many people see the value, then it receives that from the public.

I would not say AI generated art has the same value as the Mona Lisa per se, quite the contrary. I’m only declaring both as a form of art.

Yes, in the same way a field of corn on a farm can be seen as art. We do not have full control over how it actually looks in the end, but it’s an expression by natural phenomena (sometimes guided or initiated by humans).

You could argue about the amount of free will required to create art. But in that case one could philosophically raise the question if humans even have free will, and if anything may be called art then at all.

I think if something is observed as art, it is by definition art. And perhaps everything that exists and is created could fit that description. But personally one of the more interesting types of art to me are where living beings are involved in the creation, while they’re actually thinking of creating art; and I think most discussions are about that concrete level.

I’d say that open for discussion. Even taking a dump can be seen from the perspective of art, although I agree for us humans it’s quite far out there.

Perhaps to smallen the gap, think of a dung beetle rolling a ball of poo.

I’m not saying you have to like it or even that it’s noteworthy, but art in my opinion as definition can be anything that is created by something. As long as an observer looks at it as if it were art.

You’ve convinced me, your comment is objectively bad art.

I’d say everything is art, just on different levels to different people. Or nothing is art.

Chrome went to a :D above 99. But I believe they changed that, not sure as I use FF now too.

What if it was a form of damage control, where they could claim in the future at lawsuits that they had total transparency at the time of the event.

Please, I’m kidding. But it would be interesting.

I imagine it started with some sub-installations actually giving approximations that were acceptable and summed up, but then some finalizing was not taken into account or something needed to be added after the other processes are finished, and the deadline was close. That last part builds up over time with other quick additions and some annoying stuff that is actually quite performance heavy and not easy to incorporate through the whole installation. “Let’s do it at the end as well.”

No time / budget to change the 100% to 99% as they have to adjust calculations based on the processes that actually do a good job. Although a display change could fake it, priorities are elsewhere.

I thought these were AI generated at first.

Not sure how permanent these are nowadays.

Dude, that’s literally insane.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. It really does seem out of place to suddenly reference the suffering of Muslim women in this context.

He seems to elaborate in that he just thinks this case was an overreaction on the side of the woman who felt uneasy, but that of course is a different discussion. We’re not comparing suffering here. I understand the negativity he seems to have brought up on himself better now.

Do you have a source for that; what I could find in a quick Google about his statements on rape is his arguments on X is bad and Y is worse. Which is more of a logical argument, but this does not include “a Muslim would have done worse”.

Quote by him: “Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think.”

These statements are bound to be controversial as people might somehow interpret X is not bad as Y is worse. But I would disagree, this is more of a thought experiment in which you can always have a worse situation.

His wording is a bit harsh, but I don’t think what he says should receive such a backlash. He expresses hard stances on religion as well, which can hurt people in a similar way as that’s also part of their identity.

I think he’s not entirely accurate here though, as there can really be biological mixes / nuances in the sex of people. Even if you exclude the gender discussion on top. It’s all just a gradual thing I’d guess, even possibly inconsistent in ‘percentage’ on different parts of the body.

And all in all it’s also dependent on our culture how we perceive some things as feminine and masculine.

I don’t get why we can’t agree that biologically people tend to be on a multidimensional spectrum, which sometimes is too ambiguous for the naked eye to pin a binary value on. Even scientifically it could be difficult to determine. Above all, on the gender side we indeed should have the courtesy to trust how someone feels and likes to be perceived in this world.

But we can also not blame people for expressing uneasiness if the biological sex and gender are too far apart in how we defined it culturally over thousands of years. One cannot avoid some conflict there.

Hopefully we can try to better ourselves and respect others, in both ways.

Sharing ideas can definitely be worth something when it leads to something actual original/concrete/useful, but on another level.

Most ideas these “creatives” come up with are neither of those + they are not willing to put in some effort to solidify the idea themselves.

But if you cut the corpus callosum of the brain in half, it’s possible to have two operating systems that conflict with each other in actions in the body.