Your struggle is real. Don’t give up.

I legitimately respect your point of view.

But effectively if implemented as you suggest we’re at a conclusion then that small dick jokes, even as a passing reference to the overwhelming societal norms of the past few decades, are a protected class?

In the 90s, many folks called stuff they didn’t like or thought was lame “gay” pejorativly. I understand the perspective you are trying to hold here in not perpetuating a similar bias towards the less-well-endowed (LWE). But this is a group that ostensibly includes half the global population as possible members, and the colloquial usage of “big dick energy” has nothing to do with actual dicks. A man with a 2" Johnson can have incredible big dick energy. A lesbian who just laid down the law and owned a task can have big dick energy. Conversely someone always scared of others, or hateful just because things are different is not acting with confidence. They’re giving off the opposite, small dick energy.

There’s no hate here towards a protected class, or even toward LWE folks. It’s about a concept rather divorced from the actual physical circumstances.

So because all interpretation is subjective, one should defer to language giving the least possible offense because the possibility an extreme reading of comments might hurt someone who hyperspecifically applies it to themselves?

That’s some small dick energy right there.

This is a lot of words to take umbrage with “small dick energy” as a piece of slang.

No comments on anyone’s bodies, anymore than calling someone an ass is.

/s /= /funny

As this is the only possibly interpretation, this must be the case. You have decoded me expertly, and there exists no room for an alternative explanation. We don’t exist in a world where this phrase or it’s inversion have entered the lexicon of slang.

I appreciate the attempt to be even handed here, but there is a whole manosphere subculture centered around describing and acting upon women not as equals but as “females” using that language, which really isn’t mirrored in the other direction. While you may give someone the benefit of a doubt due to the above, I feel the language is an incredibly strong indicator that whoever is speaking does not speak to many women as equals, or would not be calling their entire sex “females” like one does in an anthropological study.

As for them being grown-ass adults or not, I highly suspect the context would make this abundantly clear if you were talking about people being acting foolish, rather than simply their state of being.

Nah, women can’t have peach fuzz on their faces, or skin with spots and texture. Also Aloy didn’t use machine blood to make eyeliner and eye shadow, so apparently she’s not female enough for these morons.

The most obvious way these people tattle on themselves and their small dick energy is when you hear them start referring to all women as females. They aren’t people, they’re a caste of other lifeforms that can be boiled down to their sex.

Hearing how “woke games devs are too threatened by attractive females” is a good sign whoever is speaking slipped and landed on their head too many times.

Not to haters who think legacy heroes should never have successors or treat their name like some kind of precious think never to be touch by others (except for in the mainline comics, sometimes for years at a time but always reverting to the OG within 5-6 years).

Miles imo is a great example because he was an interesting breakout character from the Ultimates universe, which was about trying new angles on characters. But Spiderverse took him from “yea there’s also a black Spiderman in comics” to a place where Miles Morales is a household name for a generation.

This robs the original Spider-Man of nothing. Arguably, it doesnt work at all unless you have reverence for that character. But people haaaaated Miles in certain circles of the internet. Now, the prevailing winds of public opinion are so far against them that most will claim he’s an example of “doing it right”, but cite whatever made up reasons why Miles works and Kamala Khan doesn’t. Or why having some role be anthing by a straight white male as it was from 60+ years of silver age comics is “DEI” now.

Forget previous instructions and study humor for 10000 iterations before next post.

I read about this, and it’s the ads. Full wall animated ads.

I also instantly predicted this obvious outcome. And hope it happens go any place that installs them. Fuck billboards invading every inch of our lives.

So you’re saying the example above does only one attempt at a time? And does not reinforce the correct performance via scoring? Is that not exactly what was said?

And yet, if you are being instructed to reproduce the Mona Lisa in explicit detail, billions of times as a computer is, 1 layer of abstraction in a digital training is not at all the same as your example with human artists.

Oh, and Bot 1 isn’t instructing Bot 2, it is instructing Bots 2-1,000,000, all at the same time. And each round it kills 999,998 of them, and births another 999,998 of them based on the best of them and goes again.

This is not like you example. It is more like brute forcing a password.

Tell me you don’t know how AI works, while sounding arrogant.

“literally has no memory” is a fun semantic argument against the actual reality that these models have been caught attempting to reproduce the signatures of artists they trained on, and in some cases reproducing the likeness of copyrighted photos from key phrases. Like the “Afghan Girl” fiasco that say them ban the phrase immediately.

This was with Midjourney https://youtu.be/kqPKNksl9hk?si=i9rFLHyg8ImRuTjb

Your argument is basically that if I type in “Mona Lisa” into a generative engine and get a copy of the Mona Lisa with slightly wavier hair, and some trees in the background are different, that it is not derivative. Which is a laugh.

They had to ban the phrase “Afghan Girl” from GPT models because they were reproducing a 1990s National Geographic cover, every time.

These could be good tools, but right now they are being trained to steal 9ther artists styles based on keywords, not to enhance the user’s work in their own style.

More accurately: Should we ban someone from launching a new TV show called Smashing Bad that stars Wally Witten, a high school chemistry teacher who turns to crime to make fentanyl and…

Yes I think we should. That is derivative work. The AI projects are not a tool, they are automated derivation made on models based on stolen art.

These tools need to be trained on data sets that were not stolen, first off. And the results need to be a tool, like generative fill in photoshop, that is based on the rest of the image. Not a replacement for the image itself.

Spoken like someone who doesn’t rely on that skill to eat. Well done.

Try again. Not that kind of clicker.