LincolnedList

The statement in quote is word for word the rethoric I'm seeing from Netanyahu fans in Israel, and probably Trump fans as well.

Framing a topic as a love/hate binaric identity war is used to prevent all rational discussion.

It might be me, but just reading this gaslighting statement fires my amygdala.

Trolls, wether intentionally or subconsciouslly found perfect tactics to destroy rational debate on the internet and the public sphere in general.

When rational discussion is suffocated, those who use agressive and toxic language with no inhibitions or restraint can win and impose their ideas.

We need to disengage from these kinds of conversations and create some forums or platforms that penalize the use of such language.

I'm pretty sure the original commentor is not dumb enough to actually think everybody who disagrees with him is a brainwashed idiot who "hates Musk". Or at least, they wouldn't dare to claim it in a civil discussion if they didn't knew they can get away with it and enjoy spewing bullshit while causing undue distress to anyone who tries to argue in good faith.

Wow, it makes a lot of sense because the UI is not focused on algorithmic mind tricks, ragegagement and advertising.

Just an anecdote but i'll put it here: A friend of mine insisted that her ex was slowly driven somewhat mad by finasteride, not in the typical crazy ex way, but obsessive somewhat delusional thoughts and moods, like he was getting stuck in a loop over some idea.

She later dated another guy who was taking it for a very long time, and said he had the same type of delusional quirks.

A rose is beautiful, a painting of a rose less so, its two dimensional and lacks many aspects of the true rose. But it has more value because there are millions of roses, while the painting captures a unique experience of viewing the rose by the painter and transmits it to the other person viewing the painting.

Unless there are ghosts in the shell, MidJourney gives an aproximation of how a painting of a rose looks like. Its like an aggrregate function that averages a million artists. Its a weird concept.

The value of art is in meaning and context. Purely generative art is as meaningful as a pretty rock. Think of the models as a camera. If you take shots from a car's dash cam in a city at random you might fall upon some really beautiful photos. But this is chance, the camera didn't create the city or its scenes. A photographer can choose or create meaningful scenes because he has a mind, consciousness and life experience.

Since all kinds of companies are getting a lot of money from the generative AI business, I think they can handle being sued for plagiarism if thats the content they produce.

Next time he will double check the hitman is legit

The energy comes from the sun, without it the atmosphere would freeze and this device wouldn't work.

Its such a contrast between this game and the Doom gallery experience that reached the top earlier.

Or at least spill wine in their face

An Iphone should weigh X grams. I think you should be able to detect tampering by weighing it.

I don't whats the margin of error/variance that passes quality control.

It depends. If ISIS does it to scare the UK into a political decision because it has no way of matching its military in the battlefield (e.g to push out UK forces in Iraq) its a Terror attack in nature.

If it is actually done to degrade the capabilities of the UK military so ISIS could use its fighters to chase them out of Iraq, or maybe, conquer a part of England - its an act of war and is actually worse from a UK POV. Calling it a terror attack would be silly.

People are biased to treat wars as better then terror because wars have rules and often involve good people trying to defend their country. But from a country's POV a terror organization is usually way less dangerous than a competent enemy military attacking.

Terror is usually done because someone lacks military competence and is willing to play dirty to even the playing field.

The establishment is so aggressive in condemning terrorism, because its easier to deal aggressively with a small terrorist organization before it becomes an established military and carves its own autonomous place on the world stage.

ISIS is a good example, it used a lot of terror tactics, but its goal was to create a country.

This is a little ridiculous. Lets say all the Lebanese "grow up" and say they had it enough with these black ops by their enemies. And so each able man takes a gun in hand and goes to war against Israel. And lets say they lose the war badly. What now?