Exactly, it was (very relatively) cheap and quick. And they figured when, not if, it breaks, it will be again quick to repair. And it is interesting tech that could be useful down the line that they may figure is worth the cost in training alone.
IIRC, 195 was an apartment number or something and some roommates made /r/195 and to shitpost in, which inexplicably became super popular. Eventually the sub got overrun by some trolls or something, so there was an exodus to /r/196.
More like a life of alcoholism seems like. Did he lie to his doc in the doc about his alcohol consumption after they told him his liver was in bad shape?
For the new game, on some difficulties it is rigged. But only ever in the player’s favor.
Lol, no, that stuff was catching on at least 15 years ago, and was a massive meme before the pandemic.
I think so long as you maintain consciousness that issue is fairly null in this particular circumstance. There’s lots of tolerance for changes in thought while maintaining the same self, see many brain damage victims. So long as there is minimal change in personality, there are lots of other circumstances that have a stronger case for killing one person and having a new person replace them due to change of consciousness, imo, I don’t think most people would consider a brain damaged person killed and replaced by a new consciousness, or a drug addiction with radically altered brain chemistry, etc.
I don’t see an issue with that. A prolonged brain surgery that meticulously replaces each part with a mechanical equivalent in sequence. Could probably remain conscious the whole time.
It helps that when one uses them on their own land, they are more likely to carefully track where they were used and can conduct cleanup operations when feasible.
It absolutely can create ambiguity, just in different circumstances. The truth is, people should just pick a format they like, and be vigilant about possible ambiguity and reword the phrase if it is unclear.
Because one is a black box that very well may just be a much more advanced version of what current AI does. We don’t know yet. It’s possible that with the training of trillions of trillions of moments of experience a person has that an AI may be comparable.
I mean, the likelihood is basically zero, but it’s impossible to prove the negative. At the end of the day, our brains are just messy turing machines with a lot of built in shortcuts. The only things that set us apart is how much more complicated they are, and how much more training data we provide it. Unless we can crack consciousness, it’s very possible some day in the future we will build an incredibly rudimentary AGI without even realizing that it works the same way we do, scaled down. But without truly knowing how our own brain works fully, how can we begin to claim it does or doesn’t work like something else?
That is a fundamental misunderstanding of how AI works. It does not shred the art and recreate things with the pieces. It doesn’t even store the art in the algorithm. One of the biggest methods right now is basically taking an image of purely random pixels. You show it a piece of art with a whole lot of tags attached. It then semi-randomly changes pixel colors until it matches the training image. That set of instructions is associated with the tags, and the two are combined into a series of tiny weights that the randomizer uses. Then the next image modifies the weights. Then the next, then the next. It’s all just teeny tiny modifications to random number generation. Even if you trained an AI on only a single image, it would be almost impossible for it to produce it again perfectly because each generation starts with a truly (as truly as a computer can get, an unweighted) random image of pixels. Even if you force fed it the same starting image of noise that it trained on, it is still only weighting random numbers and still probably won’t create the original art, though it may be more or less undistinguishable at a glance.
AI is just another tool. Like many digital art tools before it, it has been maligned from the start. But the truth is what it produces is the issue, not how. Stealing others’ art by manually reproducing it or using AI is just as bad. Using art you’re familiar with to inspire your own creation, or using an AI trained on known art to make your own creation, should be fine.
Do you actually think artists using AI tools just type shit into the input and output decent art? It’s still just a new, stronger digital tool. Many previous tools have been demonized, claiming they trivialize the work and people who used them were called hacks and lazy. Over time they get normalized.
And as far as training data being considered stealing IP, I don’t buy it. I don’t think anyone who’s actually looked into what the training process is and understands it properly would either. For IP concerns, the output should be the only meaningful measure. It’s just as shitty to copy art manually as it is to copy it with AI. Just because an AI used an art piece in training doesn’t mean it infringed until someone tries to use it to copy it. Which, agreed, is a super shitty thing to do. But again, it’s a tool, how it’s used is more important than how it’s made.
And is that a… Lego brick?
Octopi is doubly wrong, it’s Greek, not Latin. If it wasn’t octopuses it should be octopodes, ock-TOP-oh(uh)-deez.
Grizzly Bears is a 2/2 that depicts 2 bears. Implying each bear is 1/1 on its own.
They set them up the bomb, all right.
The only speed that should be relevant is the object’s speed relative to the portal. Anything else is a distraction. The physics don’t care if you are hurtling at it or it is flying at you, both scenarios are equivalent. The only way to maintain conservation of momentum is to assume your exit speed relative to the exit portal equals your entrance speed relative to the entry portal.
If it did work the other way, well it wouldn’t assuming your exit speed is equal to your initial speed, relative to the exit. That means your speed is 0 as you “exit.” This leaves us with two possibilities. Either you are smashed into a 2d plane and physics gets very concerned, likely forming a teeeeeny tiny black hole. Or the incoming matter behind the first bits will push the first layers through, which, will just wind up back at the starting point, as they will cascade into each other at a speed defined by the speed of the blue portal, being indistinguishable from the projectile interpretation.
Technically, relative to the ground the object becomes moving infinitely fast as soon as it enters the portal. I think a more intuitive answer can be found by replacing a nice discrete object like a box or group of people with a long pole that enters the portal lengthwise. Obviously, it’s going to have to be exiting the other portal at whatever speed the first portal is moving. The out speed should always be the same as the relative speed of the object to the entrance portal, it’s the only thing that makes sense, and also the only way to appease conservation of momentum.
Except there is no concept of “individual momentum,” it’s all relative to something. Not to mention, technically speaking, any specific reference point that isn’t the blue portal will actually show it has infinite speed as it instantly moves from one spot to another. I think the most intuitive answer is to imaging standing in front of the blue portal, and look through it. From your perspective, the victims are being hurled at you, propelled by the ground. As soon as they go through the portal, no linger being in contact with the ground, they are effectively projectiles. By no means a hard proof, but this video has a compelling argument for that interpretation.
It’s value is still great though because it costs nothing. Every time you draw it you may as well have just drew 3 cards, for absolutely nothing.