bubblegumcrisis

Interesting, thanks for the reply.

I'm not sure why, but my brain always gives a strong "this is not real" alert with Gaussian splats. Something about the lighting is really off for me.

And whenever I see videos explaining the Gaussian splats, they always claim they are supposed to fix lighting issues.

Is this a function of "not enough detail" or.. Something else?

If you are a computer programmer who meets up with your buddies to play every once in a while, no you aren't an artist.

If you are in a band, and you are playing all the time, obviously you are an artist. The job is facilitating you playing. The playing is the focus.

Someone who decides in college, or directly after college, "you know what, I'm just gonna be a programmer." Then touches the piano every once in a while, or plays with his friends every once in a while. I don't call that an artist.

There are so many of these people. They aren't artists. Sorry. Are the smart, probably, are they talented, probably, are they committed, yes to programming.

Sure, if you devote yourself to art, you commit, and I'm not talking some insulated school environment, to improve and struggle, and then you burn out. Yes, this is a well known path for an artist. They failed, but they are still an artist. They are a failed artist, and this is actually a proud title to wear.

Someone who decides, "I'll be a programmer for money," was never an artist. Someone who studies music in college and does admin for some company is not a "musician" and never was. It is the journey in art that makes the artist, not playing a piece.

Unfortunately art is just like that. The amount of time required in devotion to the skill is truly staggering and humbling. And then, it's never enough.

I don't know.

It is possible to make this commitment while working in some unrelated field, but it takes tremendous will-power. Charles Ives is an example I suppose.

"I was an art major and switched to CompSci purely for the money." Translation: Not an artist.

I worked for 30 years as a pianist. The number of programmers who have told me they too are a musician... No- you aren't. And you never were. That's the thing, if you were a musician, you would be playing music. That would be your job.

I mean as a hobbyist, yes, sure, enjoy splashing paint and calling it art, but spending the tens of thousands of hours to learn what music actually is, no, no, no. You aren't. Would you call yourself an architect if you can draw a picture of a building? No, you aren't.

No artist wants to "create things which were beyond their capabilities" with an AI, they want to develop their capabilities to create things beyond who they are now. Art is about discovering the world, yourself, the strange magic of an ethereal plane, some how reached through vibrations.

I don't know. Reading programmers talk about art, as if they are not dilettantes, is always depressing for me.

Wow. These are horrible. Sort of refreshing. I thought video was better than this now, but I guess not.

When I see bullet point lists, I hit the back button. Is this just me? The smell of AI- it's like rotting vegetables.

also, criminal murder charges for those who enable actions like, "poisoning a water supply," "creating an opiode epidemic," "giving millions of people cancer, knowingly"

I just don't understand why, killing one person is murder, but killing hundreds over many years is, "just the cost of doing business."

Out of curiosity - is this a "couple hours" sort of thing, or a "tens of hours" or "hundreds of hours" or other?

When I was growing up, I thought "competition" was about better products. But looking at Google and Apple, Meta, and AI - "competition" is actually about creating monopolies through evil business practices.

Growing up with the birth of the internet - I really did think it would be a force for transferring power and authority to the people. Sigh, I was I so wrong.

Where are the companies that declare, "we will be the best, come at us!"

Where are the politicians who are supposed to represent us? Oh, right. I forgot for a moment.

My thoughts exactly. Some openclaw got loose.

I think, the defining moment will be when one AI convinces another AI to convince third AI to do something.

This might seem like I'm writing a nonsense, but read it again.

LOL. I realize this isn't 4chan from 2000s- but I can't tell if you are arguing that Luigi messed up by committing murder, or he messed up by offing the wrong guy.

That's hilarious. I guess. Maybe not?

You miss the point.

Instead of, "but this, but that," you say, "what about this?"

You use your considerable brain power, to, instead of finding faults and leaving it there, you suggest something better, that you believe can accomplish the overall goal. The overall goal, I believe, is fixing wealth disparity before violence becomes the only answer.

In this manner, we come to some solution that benefits society, rather than keeping the status quo which is obviously, without doubt, broken.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Yes, divestment.

Sure you must pick a point in time. But no matter. This is what we all do on Tax day. This how home owners pay property tax.

There does not need to be an exception for stock.

This argument you make, as if "but who can say how much it really is worth?" Sure. Just like a house. Somebody builds a freeway right next to you, guess what, your house is not worth as much as it was yesterday.

Your argument, "but you can hide your money in a company." Actually, this is good point. Perhaps companies shouldn't be allowed to hoard wealth, then buy up their competitors in order to skew the market.

Maybe this is a problem. Maybe we wouldn't the google/apple phone duopoly, maybe we wouldn't have Meta owning Facebook, and Whatsapp and etc, and all this AI, if they weren't able to hoard cash.

Maybe there should be some law that says, the maximum a company can pay the top is 100 times what they pay the bottom, including the janitors.

There are lots of solutions. If you stop trying to defend some random human having the wealth of a god, it's easy to come up with many, many ideas.

Instead of say, "but this, but that", say, "what if we tried that."

I don't know about this. Pre-Trump I would have agreed with you.

Post-Trump. The mask is off, and they are evil.

How many billionaires are there? I don't think we'd miss them if they were gone.

And it goes farther than this actually.

Should we have publicly executed the cigarette CEOs, and those CEOs of the drug companies who knowingly destroyed so many lives with opiates? What about the company CEOs who poison water.

Before Trump I would have said, "no." But now, "yes." They deserved it, and by not sufficiently punishing them for their crimes against humanity we sent a message to the likes of Facebook and OpenAI and the new batch of psychopaths, that there are no real consequences for their actions, no matter how base they are.

If Trump and his family does not sit in jail after he leaves office, if the democrats do not exact retribution for all he and his ilk have done, I think there will be rioting against both sides.

I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. I actually hope I'm wrong.

But I think I'm right. And even though this post will be down-voted for referencing violence as leverage, I think these ideas are mainstream now.

This is why the guillotine will either be taxes or blades. It's either Bernie or Luigi. There is a sizable segment of the population that just doesn't have any empathy for society at large. "There should never be a cap to my selfishness."

You might think: I can argue with them.

No. You can't. They literally couldn't care less about you or anyone else. They do, however fear retribution.

<--- Who are these people. It's like they are from a different planet.

Do you think that people haven't had enough time to think about wealth disparity?

This argument you make is fine for spur of the moment violence, but for acts resulting from the structure violence of the super wealthy. Dunno.

Shouldn't this revolution be planned for sooner than later. I mean, after the billionaires have robot armies..

I always assumed that this was the end goal of the AI. It's not for normal people, it's for the super wealthy to magnify their power, both economically and physically.

I'm waiting for the first drone attack.

Here's my question:

Do you think it's more likely robots are cleaning shit out of toilets at the behest of their human masters, or do you think it's more likely that humans will clean the shit from the toilets for their robot masters.

I mean come on. We are *made* to clean shit out of toilets.

Fruit of the poisonous tree.

I wonder about the "psychopathy-sensing special abilities" being "conspiracy territory."

Let's say there were a sub-species of psychopaths.

Let's say, for you to be "evil-beyond-reason" it takes M chromosomes having N genes.

As a psychopath, you probably want to associate yourself with other psychopaths, but maybe not live/work among them, except to breed.

Why would you want to associate yourself? Because if you work in tandem, you can exploit the rest of us with less friction, i.e. make laws. Each psychopath draws their own little kingdom, for them to rule.

Hmm, I guess, if the psychopaths could "feel" that another was "one of them" they may indeed work with one another.

--

It is hard for me to think, that given the huge advantage of knowing "your kind" that you wouldn't somehow sense it.

This is crazy talk isn't it. But look at the world. It looks just like this.

Here's a question- and while I admit it is quite extreme- I've wondered this for quite some time- do please tell me why I'm wrong, because I feel as if I've started believing this more and more:

Could 5% of humanity be a psycho-path-subspecies?

These psychopaths are basically leeches on the rest of us, maybe even a cancer. Not only do they feel no guilt for enslaving other (wage-slavery), but they are also fine with poisoning the body and the mind (too many to list).

Perhaps they can even identify others with the same causal DNA segments. Sight? Smell? Micro-movements? Perhaps they really do see all non psycho-path-bearing-DNA-offspring as worms. Perhaps they intentionally breed with each other to avoid spreading the gene to vasts numbers of people.

Could this explain the vast majority of suffering?

This is just another move in a game played by the tech overlords.

It has never been so obvious as now, that justice is not blind. Without justice there is anarchy.

And at this point, to be honest, I say bring it on- let's have the day of retribution before the billionaires have their AI robot armies.

I'm not sure if Plaid still is- but when they first came out they were pretty evil. They would go into your accounts and download all activity. I spent many hours e-mailing them, trying to get a clear answer of what data they collect- and they never said no to anything.

Whenever I've been forced to use Plaid, I use a throw away "free-checking" bank account that has $1 in it.

I guess birds of a feather flock together.

Am I correct in my understanding that- they had specialized software that not only tracked the ball, calculated spins using the logo, and fed calculated trajectories?

How did you decide to work at Meta?

I'll be honest, just the idea of working there makes me feel like vomiting. For me, they are bizarrely evil. They're not evil like, "we're going to destroy our competition through anti competitive practices," (which they do), but "let's destroy a whole generation of minds."

And now with the glasses. I mean, jeeze. Can there be a stronger signal of not caring for others?

It's as if Meta sees people as cattle. Though I think a lot of techies see humans as cattle, truthfully.

What was your rationale?

I guess this question is out-of-the-blue, and I don't mean for you to justify your existence, but I've never understood why people choose to work for Meta.

This sounds like another "don't be evil." And we all know how that ends.