Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
0
Comments
332
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • There is definitely an overreaction to AI use, when specifically games can make very good use of it. Smaller teams can create better games, and using smaller AI models to run on a GPU during playing could enable some amazing new features for dialogue or dynamic storytelling.

    If there is any place where an AI hallucinating and riffing isn't a problem it's gaming.

  • Classic yawning pose. Arching pose?

  • Chernobyl is good show but one thing it got very wrong is the idea that the molten down reactor could somehow explode again for some gigantic fireball larger than the Tsar Bomba.

    It increases fear of nuclear power unreasonably. Also much much less people died or suffered from nuclear power including Chernobyl compared to fossil fuels. Even solar power causes more deaths from roofing accidents. We now know at least some of the nuclear hysteria is / was funded by fossil fuel interests.

    EDIT: I guess the point of this is to point out propaganda "side effects" of this, similar to how you should point out the copaganda in a cop show. Or in Homeland and other spy dramas the vilification of Iran. Representation in media is important, and bad representation can have deadly consequences.

  • Simon the Petrifier. A key acolyte of who's sorcerers talent Jesus planned to use to devastate the roman Legions.

    I really wish there was more badass fantasy stories based on the Bible lol

  • A virus that makes everyone ultra obedient? Could be an interesting Zombie movie.

  • They wrong him like one of those alt-right philosophy bros, as if they could somehow make him make sense.

  • <sad modem noises>

  • Caillou

  • Geforce 3090 with 24TB should be able to run a "Q5 version" of it. Maybe get a second older computer, or maybe you can run two cards in one PC.

  • Well I agree that we're seeing some kneejerk reactions to things, and unwillingness to engage or argue with perceived enemies. Like I'm so done talking politely with fascists but it swings both ways. Like that same trained behavior (because it is exhausting and painful) and good vs evil thinking has been redirected e.g. against anyone defending Russia or China or Iran. But strangely the same thing failed in trying to curtail criticism against Palestine.

    But I think part of it is BECAUSE there is no legal recourse against inciting hatred against ethnicity or genders. The US and the US owned social media are very extreme and have totally changed how people talk. Before we didn't have people just constantly dogwhistling about race etc. So because there is no defense the only thing left is being offended. There is no moderation. We are left with impotent rage.

    And of course the lawsuit in OP weaponizes that "freedom of speech" extremism. Tolerance is being sold as intolerance against the intolerant.

  • So the argument against the lawsuit in the video was that speech should be completely free and everyone just has to bear with the insults. That logically means that hate speech also has to be accepted, which is incorrect because that leads to intolerance and fascism. That is why the video is incorrect, because hate speech cannot be tolerated.

  • No the lawsuit should have no standing at all. There should be no basis on being allowed to sue for being "religiously offended". But one should be allowed to sue because hate speech like someone is inciting hatred against an ethnic group or gender or other identity.

    My point is that saying "sticks and stones bla bla but words can never hurt me lalala" like the lady in the video - that's wrong because words do turn into stones. And her argument would shut both hypothetical lawsuits down.

    Liberal AntiFa successfully sued the KKK out of existence, but it took a lot of effort because the US has no hate speech laws.

  • No, only skimmed this news but the grift is that they'll insert themselves into index listings on the stock exchange so large scale investors HAVE to buy into it. Or make your 401k invest in it. So you'll be investing in it, congrats lol.

    It's shocking nobody is stopping this completely corrupt regime.

  • And local and under your control. As a "second brain" that isn't sentient but intelligent to assist you AI has great potential. In a few years we'll probably have the models and new hardware to run good enough models locally on cheap enough hardware.

    But by then they'll have drummed enough support for "muh copyright" to buy legislation for AI licensing and make all AI models have to pay a license fee to... "someone". Like that poor writer who had his work illegally read by an AI. So then no open source models can exist and they have the monopoly. Big win for the little guy lol.

  • At least China is pushing to expand production capacity.

  • I think that's the wrong and dangerous argument. It's a typical liberal talking point... for example, allowing people to constantly spew lies and inciting people to racial hatred works in creating and recruiting more racists. Or misogynists. We've seen it over and over again. If you tolerate intolerance you soon find your tolerance vanishing.

    THAT should be what the argument should be about. Their religion of hate is intolerance, and shouldn't be tolerated, or in this case, not have any standing to sue for offending and injuring your "human dignity". There is no conflict there.

    But we need to go even further than that to prevent those with the most amount of money and power to deform the reality we are able to perceive. All humans should have a fundamental "right to reality". Not being locked up in a simulation, and not presented by news or social media that shows an objectively wrong reality, or where you can't perceive what is science and what is woo. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to outright lie and face severe consequences for such behavior.

    The principle behind freedom of speech is that democracy needs people to be able to understand the world they live in without the state or state-like entities like plutocrats being able to prevent important information and truth to be published. This has been completely perverted and speech has become a commodity, easily controlled. "They" control the agenda and call it free speech. Liberals need to understand that no principle can be pushed to the extreme. You have to look at the consequences and history. We know hate speech causes more fascists, we know lies cause subversion and destruction of democracy.

  • It's kind of like survivorship bias: The ones who rise to the very top must be the most ruthless and biggest pieces of shit. It's like taking 20 trials to rise to the top, and to succeed each trial fucking others over and only concerning yourself with your advancement is beneficial. It only leaves the worst.