Hegar

The existence of professional sports teaches children how to arbitrarily hate people by sorting them according to team support.

You imagine a world too beautiful for humans.

Sport sucks, it’s boring and teaches kids how to sort people into us vs them based on arbitrary nonsense.

But like belief in divine agency, it’s presence across most societies throughout history probably means it’s just unfortunately a part of the human experience.

Edit: “men in womens sports”: this is absolute garbage that doesn’t happen and being worried about it marks you as gullible, hateful and ignorant.

There’s really no difference between us

There is an important difference between reality and make believe.

Through UCLA’s Technology Transfer Group, which transforms brilliant research into global market products, the scientists have co-founded a medical development company called Pelage Pharmaceuticals

In case you were curious how this publicly funded research is going to be turned into private profits.

To expect any company to not steal is foolish. All development builds on previously proven ideas.

“Thank you for the offer but that doesn’t sound like something I would enjoy.”

Capitalism can’t innovate.

I imagine it would make fake-account-driven influence operations much harder, and it might drive down total online time.

This is a troll account with a post history of straight trolling. Report and block is the only appropriate response.

not really, it makes the store lock everything up behind plexiglass creating more friction for paying customers too.

That’s not really harm in the way that hunger or poverty or lobbying against workers protections is harm. That’s more like a temporary inconvenience that doesn’t stop anyone getting what they need, right?

Stealing a physical item from a giant corporate store is also always morally acceptable.

Having power neurologically suppresses empathy. Therefor resources controlled by the powerful will on average be used more harmfully. Taking resources from the powerful reduces total harm done.

You will use a loaf of bread less harmfully than Walmart will use the profit from it.

Google encourages “protecting your business against costly state regulations”

Just remove the ‘y’ from ‘your’ and the sentence goes from lie to truth.

When someone does something you don’t want them to do, but the reason you don’t want them to do it is completely invalid - that’s when you call it virtue signalling.

This kind of system is how you get the consistency and excellence that microsoft are known for.

Unless they’re axing the top 5% of the org chart, they’re not cutting the lowest performers.

Plenty of artists don’t make their art in that way. Most of the grand masters of the past had underlings who did most of the painting, and since Duchamp found objects have been considered valid art.

Cave art artist are definitely real artists, for sure.

As I said I don’t see any need to police who counts as an artist.

As a digital artist his brush is a stylus pen, but he can put that down and use a whittled burnt charcoal pencil, because they’re both largely brush-like objects. A prompt-wrangler can’t go into their backyard and whip up a midjourney-like object to use in the same way.

But I don’t think complexity of tools makes a real artist.

If the argument is that digital artists have learnt the skill of drawing and therefore count as real artists, well some percentage of prompt-wranglers can draw, and some percentage of conceptual, ‘outsider’ and other artists can’t draw.

Almost all professionally trained artists can draw, but I hope we can agree that professionally trained doesn’t = real artist either.

I think “plagiarists aren’t real artists” is a much sounder argument than this, but mostly I don’t think there’s much sense in policing who or what is a real artist. Even about stuff I don’t like.

I’m sure there are plenty of people who can both draw and type in prompts, just like there are plenty of people who can both draw and use Photoshop.

If you take away an artist’s brushes, they can’t make art without making new brushes.

All this example shows is that brushes are easier to make yourself than a LLM is.

I don’t like AI art, but I don’t think this particular argument proves anything meaningful.