I do wonder if they plan to draw a line somewhere in "how AI" the image needs to be. Like, if it's a raw photo, that's fine. If it's enhanced by filters or something, probably not AI fair to say.
But what about the, like, magic eraser and infilling? If I use a tool to erase a bunch of people from a bridge and draw new parts of bridge that weren't in the original photo... is that AI?
If I use AI to pull a mask and cut someone out from the background, and then put them overtop of a stock background, that uses AI to do work I could have done by hand. Probably fine. But what if I use AI to paint a new background that didn't exist before this photo. Is that AI?
If I take a picture of me in a real place, doing a real thing, and then use AI infill to paint a different face onto my face so it's not me anymore, but the rest of the photo including my body is real, is it AI because that person doesn't exist?
I just feel like if you've seen one comic about a dolphin tearing through someone's asshole and falling in love with a woman only to be cuckolded by her dog, you've seen them all...
I remember when art was creative, unique, and surprising...
Maybe I'm focusing on the wrong part but... a thousand dollars in damages? I know a lot of people in the states can't rub two dimes together, but a thousand dollars is like... nothing. Especially for the government and not some guy working two jobs.
They're claiming he should go to jail for 10 years for maybe causing a thousand dollars of damage to public property? I bet a single church could put together a bake sale one time and raise a thousand dollars.
Obviously if the tables were flipped, and some guy was out there breaking drinking fountains and cutting down trees in a park I'd be pissed... but this doesn't even feel like an interesting lie!
I like what you were going for, but I'm pretty sure "that" is "ðat", and "þat" would be like "thot", but with an "a". I think.
The difference between them is ð is voiced, as in your throat is making sound and vibrating, whereas þ is voiceless, meaning it's just air and your throat is still, but the rest of your mouth is in the same shape.
This is similar to how, for my accent at least, "v" and "f" are the same mouth shape, and one is voiced and the other isn't.
Ah, the Relay Server is only half of the service! If I understand correctly from the documentation I skimmed, and my existing knowledge of streaming systems, the relay server is just there to handle relaying the video stream from one device to another one in the worst-case-scenario that they can't reach each other to form a direct client-to-client connection.
So probably your relay server has never been used.
But that's just for media, and just for bad network configurations. The actual part that coordinates who can see which devices, etc, and sets up the media connections, is the other server, which it sounds like you're not running. So your services are currently still using the public server to find each other and initiate contact!
I don't know, I haven't hosted RustDesk myself, but it sounds like maybe you're not actually using your self-hosted server for your clients? Because that message sounds like it's entirely about "The Public Server" which is not your server. Right?
I'm not on the list, and I've spent all evening and all morning looking at myself in the mirror like "Am... am I a Nazi? I don't feel like one... but maybe they don't feel like one either..."
Let me say, as a person who worked at a company that used to silently disappear people, it sucked finding out in Thursday that so-and-so has been gone for a week and a half and wasn't coming back.
So I, at least, appreciate the idea that they get to communicate at all.
I'm sorry you had to find out this way, but yes, you were an extremely unfuckable kid. I hacked into their mailing lists, meeting minutes, and records, and you would not believe how much time they spent talking about you. One of them said he was feeling very desperate once, and had an opportunity with you, but before he could go through with it he realized he was better than this and it turned his life around and fixed his low self-esteem. The meeting minutes made a point of highlighting that when he was discussing his rock-bottom moment, that he may stoop so low as to assaulting you, the assembled people audibly said "eww" and gasped. When he said he couldn't bring himself to do it, everyone applauded.
Sorry champ. But the good news is you grew out of it, like that classic kid's story, The Unfuckable Duckling!
Right right right, sorry, I wasn't trying to make the claim that this was "good for the economy" or something. All I was saying was that the money didn't disappear, it was given to someone. And it wasn't Iran. Well, maybe some of it was Iran... but most of it might as well have been printed out on a giant novelty check and handed to some rich dudes.
I know that people probably know this... but I still think it's important to point out. When they say they spent $37.5 Billion on the Iran War, it's easy to imagine a large pile of money burning. And that would be frustrating.
But that's not what that means. The money didn't go away, it was spent on things, and then those things went away. And when we say it was spent on things, what that means is that companies that make those things were paid to make things, they did make those things, and then those things blew up and were gone.
So it's not so much that $37.5 Billion was spent on the war, as it is that $37.5 Billion of tax money was moved to the revenue line on the income statement of defense contractors. That's where the money went, that's who has it, not to the missiles and the dirt. And that's somehow more frustrating, but it's a lot less confusing...
Nah, respectfully, I think you're wrong. Or at least you and I don't agree on what's the funny part.
In the original the comic introduces the guy died, we learn about the tattoo, and then the joke is that Death is bashful or whatever. And the extra panel doesn't really move that joke forward at all, or enhance it or build on it. It kinda undermines it by leaving us with a feeling of "none of that mattered though" rather than leaving us with the image of embarrassed Death. It's still in there, but it's no longer the final image that lingers.
But the thing I find interesting is that you're not alone... I've seen jokes and comments before that I felt were just one panel, or one line, too long. We had the punch, and then there's just something more after. And it's happened enough I feel like it's got to be like a "kind of person" or "sense of humour" rather than just "skilled vs unskilled", you know?
Because your version does have a kind of subversion to it, a sort of second twist... but I think for me it's a twist back to where we already were, so rather than feeling like it's adding to the scenario, it instead feels like it's unconfident in its punchline. Like the comic equivalent of asking someone out, but then hedging with "as a joke", because you wouldn't want to be seen taking a risk and failing. But by not sticking to your guns you've also weakened your initial pitch. In this case they made the joke that Death is excited and shy, that's the bold premise, and the new panel instead says "but whatever though he's still cool and unmoved and the same thing would have happened whether the guy had the tattoo or not, and the joke is actually that you'd think it would even matter nevermind"
Well, that's my unsolicited critique! Sorry I just happened to read your comment while I had time and was feeling "typey" 😛
I do wonder if they plan to draw a line somewhere in "how AI" the image needs to be. Like, if it's a raw photo, that's fine. If it's enhanced by filters or something, probably not AI fair to say.
But what about the, like, magic eraser and infilling? If I use a tool to erase a bunch of people from a bridge and draw new parts of bridge that weren't in the original photo... is that AI?
If I use AI to pull a mask and cut someone out from the background, and then put them overtop of a stock background, that uses AI to do work I could have done by hand. Probably fine. But what if I use AI to paint a new background that didn't exist before this photo. Is that AI?
If I take a picture of me in a real place, doing a real thing, and then use AI infill to paint a different face onto my face so it's not me anymore, but the rest of the photo including my body is real, is it AI because that person doesn't exist?