Not sure what the context is to warrant this reaction.
I am not part of the anti-everything-ai mob.
I fully agree on both points. Llms are here to stay and people need to learn to use them.
That said: “please check the output before you hand it out” seems like such a basic minimum.
i am actually shocked that usually smart people, including school teachers. Don’t practice this minimum of quality control.
But this wasn’t a teacher, this was “the administration” a plural of people of which any could and should have done this minimum.
At that point just hand out empty notebook instead. Its would actually be useable. It would be way less damaging to the image of the school. A School that cant write legible text in officials documents isn’t worth sending my kids too.
I am not speaking on the character of these people though, i don't know them. I am only speaking on the logic of the known facts.
Which is that no one promoted blatantly bad art at any point of time.
The priest gave permission before the restoration was started, there is no way to know in advance how a finished work will look.
Then they also didn't promote it, it went viral by visitors before it was finished. And the town allegedly hated it and the women was not allowed to continue working on it. (Which she is still sad about)
Going viral caused mass tourism which was an additional burden on the town.
The decision to ask money to see it was a reaction to the spontaneous tourism and to try balance the overload it caused on a small town.
That decision ended up doing more good then anticipated and only now the town views the painting as a positive.
Then on being:
“one of six men to have been arrested by the Civil Guard as part of a fraud investigation.”
“Alleged sexual assault” is part of the investigation, but there is no mention of a victim or who of the 6 was involved with what crime.
At this point It might be as simple as he knew something from a confession and didn’t tell the police.
Your sentence about bad taste/poor judgement is therefore not relevant. We dont know their taste nor judgement.
Trump is a good example though but i can’t help but think there are people with good taste that have poor judgement and bad taste that have good judgement all over the world. Taste being very subjective also.
I had to read this a few times and can you elaborate with other examples?
In the current example taste had nothing to do with it. The lady asked if she could restore the fading painting and he was ok with it.
The initial mural was said to be artistically unremarkable. He might have valued the devotion of a follower to volunteer help maintain the church above its artistic value.
Come to think about it that “killing the person i hate and at the first sign of trouble running to start a new life elsewhere” is probably an ancient practice.
And once you done it once and have the survivorships-bias there are increased odds to do it again.
There is a weird thing that i think was hinted upon in a ds9 interview that for some reason “they” do not like to have star trek fans working on the set and those that where where supposed to act low profile about it.
I can kinda see how it can be both distracting to get work done and irritating or to have crew argue canon all the time (Henry Cavill in the wincher)
But i also can’t not see how political this might all be.
The image is digital when it is uploaded. There is a fixed assortiment of pixels only differentiated by the contrast of shades of grey.
The instructions say to colorise.
In my head this means every pixel needs to obtain a color value, while still matching contrast with pixels around it.
What ai does instead is provide an entirely newly constructed image made up from entirely new pixels which show “google deepdream” patterns.
This is from the final result where the author was “happier” with the result and asked what i assume is an llm to not invent information that isn’t there. (Zoom in)
This is not what i would call a colorisation, it’s a colorised re-creation. I imagine a real colorisation as simply a layer of color values that combine with the exact pixels of the digital scan. Disabling that layer (using photo software) should return the exact digital original and turning the final colorisation into a black and white filter should still leave it nearly identical to the original. Anything else is a recreation for fun and fantasy purposes only.
To vent, i am so glad we convinced someone in the family not to use the “ai enhanced” version for a loved ones official funeral picture.
I am sorry but
It actually kinda looks to me like an ai generated advertisement for this persons book. The adapted from makes me think its not the original text which genuinely feels uncanny and convoluted like ai does.
Are we sure this person is directly involved or was ai generated self authored articles part of the small print of a advertisement contract.
Or are we sure that their qualifications make
them really immune to make use of ai like this.
Its not that i care personally but its nice to know i am legally protected and my library isn’t going to care with how often we come lend new a new stack.
Not sure what the context is to warrant this reaction. I am not part of the anti-everything-ai mob.
I fully agree on both points. Llms are here to stay and people need to learn to use them.
That said: “please check the output before you hand it out” seems like such a basic minimum.
i am actually shocked that usually smart people, including school teachers. Don’t practice this minimum of quality control.
But this wasn’t a teacher, this was “the administration” a plural of people of which any could and should have done this minimum.
At that point just hand out empty notebook instead. Its would actually be useable. It would be way less damaging to the image of the school. A School that cant write legible text in officials documents isn’t worth sending my kids too.