You can run DOOM on E.Coli bacteria, so I’m sure you can run it on anything.
You can run DOOM on E.Coli bacteria, so I’m sure you can run it on anything.
I wasn’t aware of her existence or that of the vampire facials, but this is some Carmilla stuff. Next they will tell you they need virgin blood.
Your phone’s email app is a client, but I digress… I hate using the browser to access emails. I use many different email accounts with multiple email providers to compartmentalize my emails and avoid spam. I used Thunderbird for years before switching to Geary and now back to Thunderbird.
My first time trying to get my mother to switch from Windows to a Linux based OS wasn’t successful because there was too much friction and inconvenience for her, and she wasn’t willing to even entertain the idea of Linux for years after that. My second attempt was successful because Linux is much more user friendly than it used to be 13 years ago, and I changed my approach to make it as frictionless as possible.
Firefox just set to block 3rd party cookies + some basic extensions like adblocking and some easy privacy stuff is a good way to go about it, because it’s better than what she used previously and it doesn’t become inconvenient to her. She doesn’t know what an operating system is, or what cookies are… She just uses the computer to browse the web, emails, and light office work. She even says she prefers the current setup (though that’s because her old computer was chugging with Windows and runs smoothly now with a less bloated OS)
No need for noscript, deleting cookies, fingerprinting, or user agent stuff… Only introduce these to them if they express interest in privacy and are interested in learning more. If you try to thrust it upon them too suddenly they will just think “Linux isn’t a good user experience and is only good for tech enthusiasts and programmers”.
At this point I’d be surprised if there was a single oil billionaire who hasn’t donated millions to his campaigns.
I’m so glad we have GN bringing these stories to light.
So Trump is basically like an AI that has no will of his own and is just a predictive algorithm that is trained on his fan base? That makes a surprising amount of sense when listening to his speeches, they make as much sense as a tripping LLM that was mostly trained on other AI generated text.
This shouldn’t surprise anyone. The guy loves coal, oil, and gas, he hates anything renewable with almost the same passion as he hates immigrants. He will literally defund the EPA because in his mind the environment is fake news and because it will make him popular amongst rich business owners who get even richer from deregulation.
I’m open to the idea that should a sentient AI be made in the future, with complex emotions and desires, then that AI could create art. As it is right now, it is completely artless.
Biological weapons don’t count unless the flush mechanism fails.
I do consider photographers as artist, because there is an intentional creative process and the creation of the image; there’s a great deal of skill and artfulness to photography. When a photographer sees something they want to photograph, they decide the position, the blur, the composition, the focus… All of that is intentionally done to direct the attention of the viewer to the subject(s) the artists wants, perhaps in a specific order. It requires an artistic process to create art.
What I don’t consider as art is when a security camera catches footage, this isn’t art, it’s an image that was created without a creative intent behind its creator, just like AI generated images have no artistic intent behind them.
Prompting an AI to generate an image doesn’t make someone an artist just like if I were to hire an artist to draw something for me doesn’t make me an artist. Of course, if I hired an artist to draw something, the result is still art as it was created with an artistic process and intent, whereas AI lacks that therefore there is no art.
In the future, should a fully sentient and conscious AI exist, I would be able to acknowledge them as artists if they follow the same artistic intent when creating an image.
You misunderstood me, of course digital art is art when created by an artist, but if I pay an artist to make something I want, it doesn’t make me the creator.
If I prompt an AI, it doesn’t make me the creator either.
I can go to an online artist and commission a piece of art, but it doesn’t make me the creator, and similarly, if I prompt an AI to generate the image, it doesn’t make me the creator of the image.
Art is the conscious use of imagination to create something with the intention of it to be appreciated, experienced, and/or evoke an emotion in the observer. It requires one or two way communication between the creator and the person experiencing it.
AI generated images aren’t art because there is no conscious creator who intends to create an experience for the viewer. If a future AI is conscious and self aware enough to have a will of its own, and will use it’s own creativity to create something to be experienced or appreciated by the viewer, we would have AI art, but until then these aren’t art.
Also, the banana taped to a wall or a fruit in a cage is art, though it doesn’t mean it’s good or not. Art that sucks is still art.
I didn’t know it was a real word and assumed OP made it as a combination of abnormal and enormous. Just looked it up though and you’re right.
AI generated images are not art though. Image =/= art.
Neutrinos do interact with gravity and with the weak interaction so they are important. If they had no interaction, we wouldn’t have been able to detect them.
Assassination attempt on Trump in a rally.