Assassination attempt on Trump in a rally.

You can run DOOM on E.Coli bacteria, so I’m sure you can run it on anything.

I had to go back to check…

Also Joker makeup.

I’m open to the idea that should a sentient AI be made in the future, with complex emotions and desires, then that AI could create art. As it is right now, it is completely artless.

Biological weapons don’t count unless the flush mechanism fails.

I do consider photographers as artist, because there is an intentional creative process and the creation of the image; there’s a great deal of skill and artfulness to photography. When a photographer sees something they want to photograph, they decide the position, the blur, the composition, the focus… All of that is intentionally done to direct the attention of the viewer to the subject(s) the artists wants, perhaps in a specific order. It requires an artistic process to create art.

What I don’t consider as art is when a security camera catches footage, this isn’t art, it’s an image that was created without a creative intent behind its creator, just like AI generated images have no artistic intent behind them.

Prompting an AI to generate an image doesn’t make someone an artist just like if I were to hire an artist to draw something for me doesn’t make me an artist. Of course, if I hired an artist to draw something, the result is still art as it was created with an artistic process and intent, whereas AI lacks that therefore there is no art.

In the future, should a fully sentient and conscious AI exist, I would be able to acknowledge them as artists if they follow the same artistic intent when creating an image.

You misunderstood me, of course digital art is art when created by an artist, but if I pay an artist to make something I want, it doesn’t make me the creator.

If I prompt an AI, it doesn’t make me the creator either.

I can go to an online artist and commission a piece of art, but it doesn’t make me the creator, and similarly, if I prompt an AI to generate the image, it doesn’t make me the creator of the image.

Art is the conscious use of imagination to create something with the intention of it to be appreciated, experienced, and/or evoke an emotion in the observer. It requires one or two way communication between the creator and the person experiencing it.

AI generated images aren’t art because there is no conscious creator who intends to create an experience for the viewer. If a future AI is conscious and self aware enough to have a will of its own, and will use it’s own creativity to create something to be experienced or appreciated by the viewer, we would have AI art, but until then these aren’t art.

Also, the banana taped to a wall or a fruit in a cage is art, though it doesn’t mean it’s good or not. Art that sucks is still art.

I didn’t know it was a real word and assumed OP made it as a combination of abnormal and enormous. Just looked it up though and you’re right.

AI generated images are not art though. Image =/= art.

:0

Being dyslexic is like a rollercoaster at times. I read it as “Donald Trump brutally shot down by judge”, did a double take, and had to immediately start over.

Oh that’s such a delicious irony… Also, letting a guy who was convicted of felony forgery become vice president of the republican party is so fitting for the party of election frauds.

With that said, I do think that prisoners should be allowed to vote as they are still citizens, even while in prison, let alone during their probation.

There is a study about this (link); many people would rather have less as long as their peers are worse off. This is our inner caveman brain telling us this is a zero sum world.

Republican voters subconsciously want the other side to suffer more than improving their situation, they are just not self-aware enough to realise it.

The smartphone market has matured, so there is less of a difference between each generation. Earlier on there was a massive difference in performance:

The OG Galaxy S had 512MB of RAM, 8GB storage, and a single Arm A8 core at 1GHz, and the SII had 1GB of RAM, 16GB/32GB storage, and a dual core A9 at 1.2GHz. This is a single generation with double the RAM and more than double CPU power, and nearly 6x the GPU power (theoretically), and 2-4 times the storage.

Then the SIII came out with a quad core SoC 1.4GHz, a much larger screen with higher resolution (jumping from 480p to 720p), significantly bigger battery, and up to 64GB of storage.

The S4 doubled the RAM to 2GB, faster storage, significantly faster and more efficient SoC, a larger, 1080p display paired with a much more powerful GPU, and a significantly larger battery as well.

Back then, if you had the money, there was a considerable difference between each generation and there was a reason to upgrade, many not every year, but if you could afford it, upgrading every other year made sense.

After that, changes were much more calm. Sure, some phone makers made exciting and innovative stuff, but the hardware didn’t have a massive difference from one generation to another, and also prices were rising.

Nowadays, phones are far less exciting, but flagship phones are ludicrously expensive, and yet they sell incredibly well. While phones are being improved from one generation to the next, they feel like small steps rather than a giant leap. Our demand for power hasn’t gone up quite as fast as our phones themselves. People will keep buying phones less frequently, just like we do for laptops.

I only used it to follow some artists I like, that’s it.

I stopped using it when squacker stopped working, though I don’t think I’m in that statistic because I never had a twitter account.