top of page

Oh my, that tie

Yikes. There might be an argument to make that using AI image generators is little different from using a paintbrush in that the human directs the tool to perform a particular task, something I think is reflected in this cover artist article; the difference between the paintbrush and the tech would be that the tech stores the human's pattern of instruction (the artist's style) and can replicate it on demand (like what, a cover of a cover?).

I'm siding with the OG on this point for that exact reason - it's a tool cobbling together a product based on instructions it's received, in different ways that nevertheless follow someone else's method; rather than something that understands why it's making what it's making, seeking to share that emotion or idea - that why - to an audience. (Wanted to add that I absolutely agree with the theory about le Français being an earlier version.) It's not a whoever making that animation, it's a whatever, so how can it understand pain? (誰も versus 何も? 誰であれ versus 何でも? Gah, subtitles!) That sort of thing doesn't matter to it, only that its product is accepted by those who wrote the prompt.

Must be tough for the guys who did all that work. I have cause to say it's badass, but in this sort of application, it's somehow numbing for the person using the AI tool in a way a more involved method (such as a paintbrush or - heck, even more run-of-the-mill image editing software) isn't.

(I want to clarify that numbing in a way I couldn't earlier - making the prompt doesn't necessarily come with emotion on the user's part any more than typing in search terms might. It's utilitarian in a way that feels inappropriate to this art, which is weird coming from one who uses such art to study its related language and culture. The user doesn't necessarily have the associated emotion to begin with, or only a shallow understanding of it, when making the prompt; the AI produces an image or an animation that attempts to fit that prompt; the user, the person, accepts the product based on how well it elicits the associated emotion in - not necessarily the user even, maybe another third party instead. The tool's making the person feel after the fact, rather than the person expressing feelings through the tool, while the tool feels nothing, just does what it's told.)

I hear an echo of what I've said before, that AI's getting better and humans getting worse, in the last part of that clip, and AI's not to blame for it. (Pseudoscience, however, deserves no such faith, therefore I say AI can have at it.)

Adding this because 读写能力 是 重头, 对 不 对? 你们 的 话, 不 我 的. (Also, study material in 你们的话.) Ran into another familiar face - a guest appearance, I think, rather than a regular à la not-Aesop.

Adding this because it wasn't "compulsively," it was "impulsively." Lex. Nearly linked something to him that's more appropriate to Tentacle Beast - I really must keep track of the nicknames I use.

Ending with this because I wonder if one could add at the end of the cooking process either the sauerkraut brine or the sauerkraut itself in order to reduce the effect of heat and boiling on the probiotics. Adding half of the sauerkraut would result in different textures for the same ingredient, and that can be jarring.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Classic
  • Twitter Classic
  • Google Classic
bottom of page