Hi I’m a human, maybe a furry, not an AI. Also ‘‘venia_sil’’ on Fedia.

Sometimes my posts are licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Contact if looking for a licensing deal.

Website? Website.

  • 0 Posts
  • 34 Comments
Joined 18 天前
cake
Cake day: 2025年6月9日

help-circle


  • Because the working class is apparently too lazy and coward for it.

    Crafting a guillotine is not even that hard compared to most of the compromises taken. You don’t even need to build it up to code: if it has issues, it still gets the job done just cause extra pain to the burgeois that goes into it.

    Similarly all those *thousands* of people who are parading up in complain to Trump could easily walk into the White House and solve the problem by themselves. Instead, they are content on just “I was here”-ing for a photo.

    One thing the last elections convinced me of: at some point, people at large just want to be let be evil.



  • The latter part makes sense to me tbh. Machines should not allowed to compete with humans (in creative endeavours) because it is an intrinsically unfair competition that further erodes the rights of those humans who are more vulnerable, in the circumstance that is opposite to the intent of having machines around in the first place. They are supposed to do our beast-of-burden work, not make it so that our only pending value to be extracted by capitalism is beast-of-burden work.

    What I’m not sure I buy is the idea that the “countless works” generated by AI actually compete with the original, in particular if they are non-infringing. Let’s say I take the work of an author to train an AI on their style. The author writes exclusively noir; I instruct the AI to generate college drama in the same style. Are the new works competing? The author won’t offer me a college drama in the first place.