queermunist

queermunist, 10 days ago

This is why I don’t take them seriously. They clearly don’t believe their own bullshit or they wouldn’t just be voting.

queermunist, 11 days ago

The Earth is healing 🥰

queermunist, 11 days ago

imho the logic is reasonable but they don’t take it to its logical conclusion. Every dollar not donated to X is a dollar donated to Y!

queermunist, 11 days ago

This doesn’t make sense for anyone other than liberals.

A Republican voter deciding to stay home instead of vote for Trump clearly isn’t voting for Trump.

queermunist, 11 days ago

absolute shambles m8

queermunist, 11 days ago

They need this shit to take off and become a growth industry, they’re running out of places to put their money. Blockchain hype is dead and this is the new hotness, so everyone is getting on board and selling their bored apes to invest.

queermunist, 11 days ago (edited 8 days ago)

The way actual AI art functions now is as an extension of human artists, not a replacement. You can’t just wind up the algo and watch it go, not only does it require curation and inpainting and touch ups, but it also requires an artistic vision that can only come from an artist. Without an artist it just churns out bland content, inherently derivative and filled with errors.

My only problem with AI-assisted art is that people who don’t have any artistic taste, like managers, think that it’s good enough to replace artists. That’s not the technology’s fault, though.

queermunist, 11 days ago (edited 8 days ago)

I don’t see why an AI couldn’t be trained on specifically non-Western/counter-cultural/marginalized art. It seems trivial?

The bigger problem I see is that it can never make anything truly new, which is why it’s important for artists to keep making new art. I just think that AI, as a tool used carefully by artists to enhance their work or to take shortcuts on repetitive work, is fine.

As you said, companies are happy with AI goop that’s “good enough” and do not care about art, but that’s not the technologies fault.

EDIT Well wait, no, actually the way the plagiarism machine seeks to reduce all artwork into data points is also kind of bad since there’s no mechanism to force these AI companies to actually compensate artists.

queermunist, 11 days ago

People love talking about themselves. You can get pretty far by just listening to people.

queermunist, 11 days ago (edited 8 days ago)

Irreparably damage the NATO bloc, maybe.

queermunist, 11 days ago

Okay but like

If they move left they’ll still miss the towers. The only way they’ll hit is if they stay the course in the center.

Like???

queermunist, 10 days ago

Riding on ice scares the shit out of me, especially when it’s windy.

queermunist, 12 days ago

And canned food.

Hope you have a bidet this time.

queermunist, 12 days ago

What is your position on mercury poisoning? Woke or based?

queermunist, 11 days ago

Oh shit I love raw broccoli oh shit oh fuck!

queermunist, 12 days ago

Or derail the trolley.

Or shoot the driver.

Y’know, hypothetically.

queermunist, 11 days ago

sucks for them but I’m different 😏

queermunist, 11 days ago

What the fuck is the autonomous driving mode even for though? It seems like it’s just a dangerous toy…

queermunist, 11 days ago

I’ll clarify: what is the actual purpose of giving customers access to this infantile technology? It doesn’t make following traffic laws easier like cruise control does, it doesn’t make drivers better at driving or safer behind the wheel, and it merely encourages distracted driving.

So why did they ship this product? Again, it just seems like a dangerous toy.

queermunist, 12 days ago

Buh bye! 😘

queermunist, 12 days ago

So uh, is that traffic light in the middle of the cycling lane?

queermunist, 12 days ago

I want you to imagine Cuba having its own nuclear program and nuclear arsenal. Would that change anything for the better for Cuba? I certainly don’t think it would change anything about Cuba’s current situation, but maybe it would hold off potential future US aggression.

I’m not convinced, I think the US would become even more aggressive if there was a nuclear rival in the Western hemisphere.

Now I want you to imagine the DPRK not having a nuclear program. Would they actually be vulnerable to Western aggression? They have the fourth largest military in the world, with or without nuclear weapons they could flatten Seoul. Do the nukes actually help? Maybe.

Again, I’m not convinced. I don’t think nuclear weapons are as powerful a deterrent to be worth bothering with. I’m not even against enemies of the US/NATO suicide pact having nuclear weapons, I just question if they’re really the best use of resources or worth the consequences.

queermunist, 12 days ago

Unarguably, huh? So the fact that the Korean People’s Army could flatten Seoul with ballistic missiles is unimportant? Or that they have the fourth largest army in the world and are ready and willing to fight back against invasion? Or that China is their closest ally?

I’m sorry, I just don’t think nukes are the only reason they haven’t been attacked. I think the nukes are icing on the cake, not fundamental to resisting US imperialism. The US can’t even muster the political will to start a war with Iran, which they’ve also wanted to do for decades.

And it’s not like nuclear weapons have kept the US from instigating trade war, proxy war, or using sanctions as siege war. They’re not that great.

queermunist, 12 days ago

I question if the funds would be better spent doing other civic works projects like nuclear power plants. I just don’t know if they’re as big of a deterrent as is claimed.

Besides, if the US was willing to sacrifice Seoul then why didn’t they invade before the DPRK attained intercontinental capacity? If the US was willing to sacrifice its pawns so easily then surely they would have invaded before there was a risk of nuclear bombs hitting the US. I think it’s because the US would lose if it invaded, because the Korean People’s Army is the fourth largest in the world and properly trained and equipped. They’re the true deterrent, I’m just not convinced that nuclear weapons really matter that much. I think it’s overblown.

queermunist, 12 days ago

Win or lose, I still think it’s enough of a deterrent to keep the US from attacking, which is why the US didn’t invade to prevent the DPRK from achieving intercontinental capacity in the first place. It seems clear to me that nuclear weapons came long after such a war was untenable to the US. Until I see a serious downsizing of the Korean People’s Army I’m going to be unconvinced that nuclear weapons actually matter.