200fifty

No worries!

Oh I wasn’t commenting to criticize you – just adding more insane context for people who didn’t feel like reading the full article lol

couple things:

1. in the article it turns out he isn’t even actually generating the images, he just created 187 AI images and it rotates through them
2. one of the most insane things about our society right now has to be that someone can come out and say “the goal is to create the most addicting thing” and expect praise for it :/
3. a woman made a version with men, “FriendOrFoeAI”, and the twitter replies (and her replies to them) are amazing

Would you still find it in bad taste if it asked “Do you find her attractive? Yes/No” to fine tune mating preferences rather than the crude “Smash or Pass”?

oh hey, i love awesomewm! i’m much less amenable to fiddling with annoying linux config than I used to be, but the lua-scriptability is just appealing enough that I don’t mind messing with it a bit to do silly things

I just use xfce4-terminal though lol

sidenote, I went to edit this post and accidentally deleted it instead. Would it be so hard for lemmy to use words instead of a million cryptic icons…

oh hey, i love awesomewm! i’m much less amenable to fiddling with annoying linux config than I used to be, but the lua-scriptability is just appealing enough that I don’t mind messing with it a bit to do silly things

There’s something infuriating about this. Making basic errors that show you don’t have the faintest grasp on what people are arguing about, and then acting like the people who take the time to get Ph.Ds and don’t end up agreeing with your half-baked arguments are just too stupid to be worth listening to is outrageous.

Hey, that’s what we’ve been saying for years!

I like how the assumption seems to be that the thing users object to about “websites track your browsing history around the web in order to show you targeted ads” is… the “websites” part

Raise your hands if you’d rather go back to a world without Airbnb.

I mean the sneers just write themselves

Exman tells PopSci that, even with ChatGPT’s deficiencies, administrators believe the tool remains the simplest way to legally comply with new legislation.

I mean it’s certainly simpler to do things incorrectly. Can’t argue with this logic

there actually is a comment making this point now:

Isn’t this product kind of impossible? Like a compression program that compresses compressed files? If you have an algorithm for determining whether a generated image is good or bad couldn’t the same logic be incorporated into the network so that it doesn’t generate bad images?

the reply is a work of art:

We’re optimistic about using our own algorithms and models to evaluate another model. In theoretical computer science, it is easier to verify a correct solution than to generate a correct solution (P vs NP problem).

it’s not even wrong, as they say