All Activity

Zubimendi (plays for Real Sociedad) would be a good option imo. Not a carbon copy of Partey's style but he's got a good passing range and is very good at making interceptions in the opposition half. Is solid defensively as well so would allow Rice to play more box-to-box.

That wasn't the only reason they loved Renly. But they were right to in any case!

My feeling is that we've moved on from this being a logistical issue - especially one that Ukraine can now exploit - and gone to a more urgent issue of stopping advances. Per reports Russia is flying flags in towns NW of Avdiivka: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/apr/24/russia-ukraine-war-live-us-biden-senate-zelenskiy-aid

@Ser Scot A Ellison, here's something I wrote a while back on Andy Warhol and postmodernism, which conveys my feelings about copyright fairly well. The piece is somewhat on the cynical side, and I could write a sequel that pushes back in certain ways, but its main purpose was to present the broader context for Warhol and pop art. At very least it's some food for thought. https://phylogenicrecords.wordpress.com/2022/06/21/a-copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy/

Christ. McConnell saying something that makes sense.

Using a learned language model to help you develop your own ideas isn't the same thing as using it to output ideas for you. I know people who use ChatGPT to help the code, or to manage workload, plan things... I don't see a problem with that (well, there might be issues around how certain information got into the database, particularly with code? But if it's just rehashing publicly available info I don't see how). Obviously you have to be careful about it because of LLM's propensity to hallucinate convincingly, but it's using it to just check stuff or organise stuff or even bounce thoughts off - okay. It's when people use it to directly create things that there's an issue. Because by the way they function there's just no way for them to do it without lifting someone else's work. Yeah, it'll often be incredibly fractured pieces, but if someone writes a story in Chat GPT it's because someone wrote a story and it was put into ChatGPT. When an AI art generator puts out an image, it's because other people's images are in its database and it's lifting them to put into the picture. My dad's girlfriend is a teacher and she told us over Christmas that she used it to generate a poem to teach her students how to analyse it. I don't understand that at all because sure, you could teach the structure- but what the hell are you analysing?

Right. My concern (and I'm by no means an expert here) is that it would take a significant expenditure of ATACMs or other highly valuable strike capabilities in order to achieve even that much. If it were a matter of 1 ATACM = 1 month of disabling the bridge, then I expect Ukraine would happily take that exchange. But I don't think it's that simple or easy. I am sure that Ukraine has no shortage of targets that it would love to hit. But I wouldn't underestimate the importance of the bridge as a strategic target. Supplying Russian forces in Southern Ukraine is not easy, and severing one of the two main connections would cause a lot of problems for Russian logistics. It would also create the possibility of logistical bottlenecks in occupied southern Ukraine, which would make for juicy targets.

I think that's cool, but also I think it's somewhat problematic that a lot of these works are heavily derivative of existing artists to the point that they're copying. I don't know that that's how you're using this, mind you, but if you're producing something that has a ton of artwork that is in the similar vein of existing artists and those artists aren't getting any credit I think that's pretty immoral - especially if you're then making money off of that.

To paraphrase Barthes, a text is a tissue of quotations, drawn from innumerable centres of culture, rather than from one, individual experience. The essential meaning of a work depends on the impressions of the reader, rather than the passions or tastes of the writer; a text's unity lies not in its origins, or its creator, but in its destination, or its audience. Though Barthes writes about literature, I would think it's applicable to any other art. As we subject the theory of art as a purpose to the rigours of reality, it may encounter other problems. There are many works of art where the author or their intentions (whatever they may have been) are unknown to us. Some pieces of art may be serendipitous accidents, experimental uses of materials or technology, a collaborative conjunction of intentions (if you listen to a Mozart piano concerto, whose intentions or purpose are you experiencing? Mozart's? The conductor's? The pianist? The orchestra's?). Anyway, as I said, this is a complicated matter, I'm not really an expert and I don't entirely disagree with you. You may take all this as a diversion or food for thought rather than as a challenge to what you said.

I think you're not asking the question you actually want to ask. The question isn't whether AI produces art. In the common sense of the term (an artistic creation produces emotions) or in some scholarly perspective (art is reception of a work, which is an active and evolving process), AI does produce art. But this raises a few interconnected questions: - AI can reproduce the artistic processes of humans (copying while introducing variations). This is a big one, because on some level life itself is also generating copies with variations. - The pursuit/production of art is one of the few things that is considered to elevate the human -mortal- existence. On some level, it is sacred, because producing meaning is the domain common to humans and God(s). - In a socio-economic structure that seeks to extract profit/rent out of all activities, won't AI-generated art be used to reduce humans to mere consumers of art, in yet another example of economic liberalism cheapening/lessening the human existence/experience by merchandising it? - Will we be able to notice if the quality of art stagnates - because we rely on machines too much, and their capacity to innovate ends up being less than that of humans? [i.e. if the first point/question turns out wrong, we may not even notice - at first] Or, as this tweet says in simple terms: Humans doing the hard jobs on minimum wage while the robots write poetry and paint is not the future I wanted So Scot, I think you want to ask whether AI should produce art, or whether this shouldn't be a sacred domain reserved to humans (and God(s)). Or, to put it differently, whether AI-generated art is a form of blasphemy. And though I'm not a luddite, I'm inclined to think that it is. Recent history shows humans tend to misuse technology, and in the current socio-economic structure, this kind of tool crosses the line. It would be more sensible to introduce a moratorium on AI right fucking now, before it crosses the next line. But of course, we're not going to do that.

I am totally in agreement here. Just as I don't think ANYONE should be allowed to release "lost recordings" and demos from deceased recording artists, Hollywood shouldn't be able to use an actors likeness without coughing up the $$$. As I said upthread, studios abusing this isn't an AI issue, rather it's just another example of the extreme Late Stage Capitalism bullshit we're ALL suffering through at the moment.

There's also a question whether they want to focus their limited resources on a mostly symbolic target like the Crimean Bridge, rather than targets of far greater short-term importance, such as airports, major ammo warehouses, equipment storage depos, radars, etc.

They can be mistaken, sometimes. They seemed to love Renly because he dressed nice, after all

what is the percentage of trans women wining over cis women? i have seen trans women lose and win in competitions, dont see how thats particularly unfair. as other people said, sports is inherently unfair, you can have genetic advantage, or money advantage,etc. like if all people want is making sport fairer then focusing in trans people is ridiculous, makes no sense to me, given that they are a super small percentage. and there are currently in sports much more unfair things (and i dont think trans women in sports is unfair) that focusing in trans people has to have another explanation other than the suposed unfairness that they bring nobody is saying that michael phelps or usain bolt or serena williams wining is unfair, all of them have advantages (genetic or otherwise) over their competition.

It probably always will be that way, though the persons affected can't afford to be so sanguine about it. @Ser Scot A Ellison, I do worry about all the ways that artists these days are devalued and screwed over. But this was happening long before AI started pumping out art. With predatory contracts, media consolidation, torrents, streaming, cheap production software, general anti-art populism, and countless other factors, artists tend to be shafted. AI will likely make it worse (further down the road at least), but not all that much worse. Because it's been bad for a while!

In all sincerity… congratulations!

You could collapse multiple spans of the deck, which would knock the bridge out of commission for many months rather than a few weeks to a couple of months at a time, and both the rail and road sides. It depends how many ATACMs they have, how many they want to waste and the chances of intercept (though whether even S-400 can intercept ATACMs is a big question).

Soft southern shite.

Well, I disagree completely. But then again, it's probably fair to say I'm biased to some extent. Personally, without the assistance of ChatGPT, my invention would probably be stuck in my living room forever. It has literally changed my life. I have used this tool to help turn my idea into a company potentially worth hundreds of millions of pounds. And directly because of assistance rendered by ChatGPT, I could be on the verge of doing something really good in the field of sustainable agriculture and crop security. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. People just have to accept that, as with most technological advances, some industries are going to be negatively affected. That's life. That's the way it's always been. And the way it always will be.

in what way?

Another recommendation from an online source included T.R. Napper's Neon Leviathan. This sort of cyberpunk collection of short stories is in the vein of William Gibson's Burning Chrome, but instead of The Sprawl and Tokyo from the perspective of the 1980s, most of the collection of Leviathan take place in Southeast Asia and Australia with much more modern sensibilities. Greg Patmore reads the audiobook, and he does a fine job. T.R. Napper is an Australian social worker of some variety in Vietnam, so he writes whereof he knows in terms of the scenery and worldbuilding, and his critique of the misuse of power by governments and corporations is very cyberpunk - I doubt very much that China is going to enjoy their portrayal here, for example. None of the stories is very long, but Napper handles the short story / novella form with expertise. Anyone who enjoys an action-packed short story that skewers the government or corporations of the near future will enjoy cyberpunk in general, and these stories in particular. Good stuff.

no, your emotions are valid, its just not art, if everything is art then nothing is. and im with scott in this one, art must be created by a sentient being, art is purposeful. to me art is more than a colection of random things that happend to be configured in something beautifull or awe inspiring

Thinking about it, Cheick Doucoure at Palace might be an answer. Though I think more likely if you don't get Bruno G you'll probably look out of the league.

Callum Turner (from Masters of the Air) cast as Case for Neuromancer. https://tvline.com/casting-news/callum-turner-neuromancer-cast-apple-tv-plus-adaptation-1235203839/