Value of art is always in the eye of the beholder. If many people see the value, then it receives that from the public.
I would not say AI generated art has the same value as the Mona Lisa per se, quite the contrary. I’m only declaring both as a form of art.
Yes, in the same way a field of corn on a farm can be seen as art. We do not have full control over how it actually looks in the end, but it’s an expression by natural phenomena (sometimes guided or initiated by humans).
You could argue about the amount of free will required to create art. But in that case one could philosophically raise the question if humans even have free will, and if anything may be called art then at all.
I think if something is observed as art, it is by definition art. And perhaps everything that exists and is created could fit that description. But personally one of the more interesting types of art to me are where living beings are involved in the creation, while they’re actually thinking of creating art; and I think most discussions are about that concrete level.
I’d say that open for discussion. Even taking a dump can be seen from the perspective of art, although I agree for us humans it’s quite far out there.
Perhaps to smallen the gap, think of a dung beetle rolling a ball of poo.
I’m not saying you have to like it or even that it’s noteworthy, but art in my opinion as definition can be anything that is created by something. As long as an observer looks at it as if it were art.
You’ve convinced me, your comment is objectively bad art.
I’d say everything is art, just on different levels to different people. Or nothing is art.
If for example a client application is (accidentally) firing doubled requests to your API, you might get deadlocks in this case. Which is not bad per se, as you don’t want to conform to that behaviour. But it might also happen if you have two client applications with updates to the same resource (patching different fields for example), in that case you’re blocking one party so a retry mechanism in the client or server side might be a solution.
Just something we noticed a while ago when using transactions.
Interesting, I work with both at my job and my main take is:
CLI of Mac is superior to me and least confusing, plus has it’s whole CLI experience working correctly for a long time, but Windows did a bit of a catch-up (still not on par IMO and too many ways of working)
The GUI settings are more advanced on Windows, but the new/old interface are a cluster fuck; I don’t trust the interaction between them
Windows has more compatibility options with hardware/software, if you dig deep enough you can make things work most of the times
The general MacOS experience (from starting your computer, opening apps, using the CLI) performs better, Windows feels a bit more sluggish/bloated to me
I do like the steps that Microsoft takes with things like Visual Studio Code and .NET of aiming cross-platform. I have in no way any hatred for Microsoft and I think both operating systems have their pros and cons. They are both fine to work with.
Last thing I heard at least ChatGPT 4 was said to be better, but that was a while ago (in terms of AI chatbot timelines). Do you perhaps have a source for the 10x better part?
The text might be automatically added with some script or AI, to perhaps fit different sizes or create items in a batch. Or someone was really lazy, or a combination.
That’s a fair point. And I believe AI should be able to combine legal material to create illegal material. Although this still feels wrong, if it excludes suffering in base material and reduces future (child) suffering, I’d say we should do research on it at least. Even if it’s controversial, we need to look at the rationale behind it.
Of course we don’t want both, but it comes across as if you’re dismissing a possible direction to a solution to the one that is definitely worse (real life suffering) by a purely emotional knee jerk.
Mental health support is available and real CSAM is still being generated. I’d suggest we look into both options; advancing ways therapists can help and perhaps at least have an open discussion about these sensitive solutions that might feel counter-intuitive at first.
I believe from Instance A, you can only subscribe to a community on instance B if both A and B allow it. Otherwise you need to create a different account in instance B.
This way an instance can have some kind of governance over its users and the content they see.
I wonder if an SSO solution exists and is supported by many instances, so as a user you won’t notice much of the different accounts you could have.
Aren’t there like cheat servers and non-cheat servers? Or is that a “gentleman’s agreement” that not everyone is playing fair with if you can’t fully block it because of mods etc?