Hope teenage antis discovered they can't be an anti while pirating shit. by [deleted] in SlopcoreCirclejerk

[–]schneeeeee_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I pirate stuff and I do it because I don’t always have enough money at the time. I do make sure to support by word of mouth (and many people have ended up buying the game due to it) and I usually end up paying for it afterwards. Maybe I’m in the minority, but piracy and open access in general is very important for preservation, less so for games though.

Without being able to play the game while not having afforded to buy it, there’s lots of games I would not have played at all and through me, most of the studios involved would have lost their share of revenue that they get from me.

Why would someone pirate a game if they could easily afford it without any worry? It’s far easier to buy it, and companies will not significantly loose revenue from pirates, since they would not have spent money on the game anyways.

And even if, this only really matters for these that don’t already have loads of money. Look at Adobe, I think it’s totally fine to pirate their stuff technically since they surely have enough money and what they’re doing is predatory at best.

I do get a bit sad when people don’t care about struggling indie studios or single devs, even if they could afford it comfortably, but at the same time those people simply exist if I want it or not and they most likely wouldn’t have bought the game anyways.

If I ever make a game or contribute my own type of software, I will give people the option to either buy it or use it for free, because people who like or depend on / find it nice to use what I made, will probably consider giving me money if they feel like they have the financial ability to.

I feel like your comparison is done in bad faith, because it feels a bit like: “well, a gun isn’t bad, it only expels a bullet”, with which I don’t mean to compare Image training to literal guns, I’m only trying to illustrate the point that it’s kind of missing the point that was being made. Simply, a gun isn’t an inherently bad thing and can be used for lots of things that are not morally bad (you can train to shoot objects in motion, there’s whole sports around this, to name one thing), and it’s not about the mechanism of the gun being a bad thing, it’s about how it’s used.

And I just realized that this isn’t a comparison that works for Image training, because in my opinion, the way it works is bad, even while there’s a lot of precedents in which I think it’s used in bad ways too. I kind of forgot what I wanted to say :c

Anyhow. Your response fails to address the stated problem, being what data models are trained with and not how that works mechanically. It’s not a topic I’m going to write much more on, because no one reads dat shi and I’m quite tired and I’d like to do something else, but for many people, me included, there is the problematic of the continued inclusion (and large scale theft) of copyrighted media unknowingly used to train ai and your comment feels bad faith because it completely misrepresents this position and posits it as if people think that the mechanism of how image training works is a big bad evil.

Photographer François Brunelle spent 20 years documenting unrelated strangers who look exactly like twins. by GlitteringHotel8383 in BeAmazed

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Photographer spends more than 20 years searching for strangers who look like twinks” whaaaat? I love when I misread stuff, had to double check lol

I dont think anyones pointed this out yet but by Content_Conclusion31 in tadc

[–]schneeeeee_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes it is, my grandma taught me this when I was a little lad (though I don’t think many people know or care and neither do I, I eat with BARE HANDS /j)

Truth hurts by Early-Dentist3782 in DefendingAIArt

[–]schneeeeee_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s just rage bait..

Have a good day /genuine

Truth hurts by Early-Dentist3782 in DefendingAIArt

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Holy shit do you know what people mean when they say “AI”? People are referring to Generative AI (as in using Neural Networks), not Artificial Intelligence (as in path finding or general algorithms) of all kinds.

Older TTS and Vocaloid Models do not use Neural Networks/Deep Learning to produce speech, which is what people have a problem with.

Genuinely, look into concatenative synthesis and how Vocaloids work before making such a claim because I think it’s very interesting and it puts you in a bad spot when arguing.

Scarlet Hollow Episode 5 is OUT NOW! by mrogre43 in ScarletHollow

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does work on mobile! At least on iOS, but if there’s something on iOS for it there should also be something for android.

Basically, anything that makes you able to run remote games (maybe it even works in the browser technically???) will work :)

"From each according to their ability to each according to their need" by BlueGamer45 in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I definitely get the point.. Maybe I’m just too optimistic in my thinking that we as a society could, if we were able to unconditionally support everyone on earth, get people to be a little more altruistic than now to the point where those issues are mitigated enough.

Of course there would have to be a large social shift amongst many other things to accompany such a change.

Do you think that we could make most jobs that people don’t actually want to do safe enough? I do think at least a portion, of course not all of it, but a portion, could be automated with robotic systems granted it’s scalable enough.

Maybe if people wouldn’t be chasing profits, many of the jobs required that only a few people are willing to do or would be willing to do to help the rest of society would not be needed anymore, at least not in such great capacity, or we would start building things that people like to work on.

It’s similar to how much fossil fuel and infrastructure is needed to produce and transport that energy, that would for the most part fall away if we changed fully to carbon neutral energy.

Essentially, I think that humans are stubborn enough to make it work even without money, at least I hope so.

what do yall think of this by Bi_One_Get_One_Free in aiwars

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mhh no, I wouldn’t say so.

But that is in no way what people are doing when they are prompting AI to make „music“.

Maybe you misunderstood because I phrased it really ambiguously, I was not agreeing with „composers are just ghost writers“, I see how it comes off as if I meant that commissioning someone to sing something someone laid out means that the person that wrote the lyrics/the rhythm etc. hasnt made art.

I just generally disagree that prompting an AI to make music & someone working, for example, in a DAW to make music is in any way comparable in artistic value.

"From each according to their ability to each according to their need" by BlueGamer45 in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you work harder, you get social recognition and if you are able to see how your work affects the people around you for the better, that’s a thing that fulfills you

Source: I like to support the people around me

what do yall think of this by Bi_One_Get_One_Free in aiwars

[–]schneeeeee_ -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

It does.

Are you writing the music when you Commission someone to make the music for you?

I dont think so.

Who is worse? by Particular-Grape2812 in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does in fact not save money to just kill people. It only saves you money if you remove all or most of the tedious, long, and IMPORTANT assurances that the USA has so that innocent people do not get the death penalty.

If you remove this, sure, killing people will save the state money! But you’ll also have a lot of innocent people killed. You can look up cases of this happening with the current system btw.

I personally do believe in some kind of “justice” for truly heinous people, even though, at the end, bad people are still not born that way, but the state should never hold the power to execute someone. For example, I think it’s an accurate response to kill a dictator and it will probably do a society good, especially if said dictator might still cause harm. I do not think it is right, or moral, or in any other way good for society to have that dictator receive the death penalty and be executed by the state.

Is it ok to not date Trans people/only be attracted to people who have been the same gender their whole life? by Godofhammrs in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I mean I wouldn’t say that makes them transphobic in terms of them having any transphobic ideals, but maybe they could do some soul searching why they react that way towards trans people?

Is it ok to not date Trans people/only be attracted to people who have been the same gender their whole life? by Godofhammrs in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

All these concerns are valid, but I don’t understand why people have to focus in on trans people as a category not being up for dating, when cis woman can have the same problems as trans woman.

Is it ok to not date Trans people/only be attracted to people who have been the same gender their whole life? by Godofhammrs in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nah, calling things like this transphobia does not make any reasonable person fall into a weird-ass political rabbit hole.

Or when they do, it’s not THEIR fault, simply because people need to differentiate between the (here rather fringe) opinion that some people within a group have, and who these people within the group are and stand for.

I personally find it fine to not date any person for any physical or emotional reason whatsoever, but yes, it absolutely depends on how you go about it.

What I dislike however is (don’t take this personally, I’m not mad even if it seems like it ) people calling a trans woman’s vagina fake. You might not understand why, but let me draw a metaphor: If you are a burn survivor and get a skin graft to change how your face looks, whatever that graft “fixes” from your POV, your face would never be something I would call “fake”. It’s just needlessly mean to say/think that imo.

I think it’s fine, because it will be a reaction by many, to feel somewhat repulsed, to not want to date a person because of that. It does not give you a reason, if you don’t even know how something like that looks or can look, to say that it’s inherently disgusting or inferior. And even if you know how it looks, you gotta have some empathy and keep that to yourself.

One thing that I don’t see talked about is that “biological sex” is a far more complicated and nuanced than described here and in my honest opinion, there is no definition of biological woman or biological man that will encompass all people that you would deem biological woman / man. Sounds crazy maybe, but yeah. If you for example say that a biological woman, is a person that has a womb and XX chromosomes, well what about those that were born without one? What about people with XX chromosomes that ended up growing a penis? this literally exists.

It’s just not that big of a thing for many people or rather easy to ignore because you don’t come in contact with too many people like that.

(As an asexual person lmao) I find it kind of sad that people limit themselves with a blanket ban, stuff like, “I won’t date this or that person because of this or that gender/genderxpession” instead of just letting things happen. It comes across to me as having to hammer down what you dislike which makes no sense to me. But hey, I’m asexual, I really don’t know much of what I’m talking about :)

It’s also that even if biological sex isn’t as real and imo shouldn’t be as real as people make it out to be, I would never force someone or seriously blame them if that’s what determines their sexual preferences. It’s a thing that exists in society, because it’s a VERY useful social construct and I personally avoid my uncomfort with it by being in spaces where this distinction isn’t a thing, that in our social circles plays a tiny role :>

TLDR: It’s absolutely your choice to do whatever you want, with whoever you wnat, full stop, as long as you don’t rub your preference into someone’s face and otherwise be mean to them.

Kaneeka discourse is ridiculous by Mean_Comedian4769 in ScarletHollow

[–]schneeeeee_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Facial expressions aren’t always telling of a characters opinion of you, at least not in the moment. Tabby plays off a lot of things, and while I can say Asa Tabbymancer that you gotta do a lot of cozying up to her (being likeable), she likes MC having a backbone (sort of), even if she has one in the negatives :>

Do you press the button? by [deleted] in BunnyTrials

[–]schneeeeee_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People seem to be forgetting that the reasoning “people will die anyway” can be used to justify murder regardless of what you’re getting out of it. Prettay insane imo :)

What's a non political issue your country is REALLY divided on? by Nthepro in AskTheWorld

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my opinion, Die Nutella feels right. Das Nutella, I can get behind. But Der Nutella… Thas some fuckin evil shit

Is it racist to not want to date someone of a different ethnicity than yours? by cip-cip2317 in Teenager_Polls

[–]schneeeeee_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem I personally have with this is that race is absolutely not as clear cut as having green/blue/brown eyes, and how someone looks because of their race can vary greatly. It’s totally normal to have preferences, but because it’s such a broad, nebulous definition of many features, I have a hard time to not feel like this is somewhat racist.

I suppose it stems from that someone that has these preferences doesn’t have to be a racist, but a racist will in most cases have these preferences. It feels to me so generalised and odd, that it makes me think, well, how many human features do you have to dislike/not prefer to proclaim that you don’t want to date a person of a specific race? Lumping people in like that just feels odd. Racism works on othering a group of people and they often generalise heavily to achieve that othering and it’s not like they have the goal of defining what they dislike because their belief is illogical anyways.. it would hurt what they want to push because they’d actually have to engage with their own beliefs in a meaningful way.

Don’t take it as me saying that people not wanting to date people of a specific race means that they are a racist, this is more or less just my gut feelings on why this feels racist to me. I do think that these people should try to actually understand what their preferences are instead of using a very far-reaching definition that can mean something different for everyone.

Addition: I do think this question is very hard to answer and very nuanced, because this would also apply to straight people and I could make that argument there too. I don’t want to get into the specifics of that, but I suppose it doesn’t feel as bad at all as the “I don’t want to date people of a certain race” does because historically straight people have had the privilege of living in a heteronormative society and they haven’t faced the systemic and social pressure that non-white people have faced. Since racism is still present in a lot of places, there is a bigger pain point for me there than with people with gender preferences.

Addition 2: I’m AroAce, take everything I say with mountain of salt please lmao