Silas

FUCK OFF I'VE NEVER ASKED FOR THIS GET OUT OF MY FUCKING LIFE

Big Thunder on an island >>>

Euro-Shat

My prayers to @theknexmaker.bsky.social have been answered 🙏

Doesn't touching a butterfly's wings cause them to... you know... not be able to fly properly anymore?

They always say "a chain is as strong as its weakest link" but this is just the whole gear that's broken 😭

Zou grappig zijn als er alsnog kinderen invallen, die kruipen daar zo onder

As I've said before, it's not the main issue here but just a general thing with gen AI images, but it's all just such a massive middle finger to the arts and artists. I can go on and on about how people lose their jobs over gen AI and stuff, but that's not the point here.

Correct, so we can go back to the original point: why resort to gen AI for an image THIS SIMPLE? Humans produce things based on existing works, that's true, but at least they're capable of having a creative spirit (and are still called out when it is blatant theft instead of inspiration).

Writing a prompt isn't the same as coding unless you're already very VERY specific, and even then... Sure, you can simplify it a LOT to the point where it's Scratch, but there's still a logic behind it. Same with calculators. It has a consistent result. AI doesn't translate, it interprets.

We're going in loops here. Surely you understand there is a big difference between a prompt and code right? There's a reason ChatGPT has a disclaimer at the bottom that you should fact check certain information, while a calculator doesn't. That makes the calculator a tool, and AI (generally) not.

"consensual" with someone who can't legally give consent.

The sky is blue, roses are red.

Biggest blackmail in ages

❌ A/I can’t replace real skills
❌ A/I can’t stop crime before it happens
❌ A/I can’t have real feelings or thought
❌ A/I isn’t therapy

✅ A/I is hurting the environment
✅ A/I is plagiaring creatives
✅ A/I is moderated by underpaid traumatized workers
✅ A/I can give you psychosis

🚫SAY NO TO GEN A/I🚫

And nowadays, AI programs seem to reference actual sources more and more for text-information. Which is good! It used to be different, so it's a very welcome improvement. But the images? The art? All stolen.

Aside from the fact that Google's AI is absolute dog shit, there's still a distinction between the different types of AI use cases. Generative AI for images, which was the original topic, is ALWAYS plagiarism. Summarizing information when not citing the original source, is also plagiarism.

"The level of knowledge"

The level of knowledge has become zero. Saying "make this for me" will forever be different than "run this code that I wrote". There is, 100%, a conceptual difference.

And no, I love calculators, because THEY ARE A TOOL.

"Don't release them!!"
"Sir, we're done erasing your name from the files"
"RELEASE THE FILES, LIKE I'VE ALWAYS ASKED!"

They have no shame in keeping their userbase hostage

You can tell this is AI because a MAGA will never admit this

Groups who are discriminated against discriminating other groups is actually crazy

You're right in that Python translates the code, but you still need to write the code! Python isn't gonna do anything if you don't tell it to print Hello World... *with a line of code*.

It could, but Gen AI isn't a tool. It does literally everything for you after giving one prompt. Tools need to be used, by the creator, they're not the creators themselves.

Big difference between referencing and plagiarism mate.

Anyone who says that would be suspended. This would only be an issue if it's only one side that gets the treatment. If I shoot someone who I think is evil, I will still get jail time.