If I’m wearing something slutty, it probably means I want sex.

It doesn’t mean that I want sex with you in particular. (General you, not you-in-particular, just to be clear.)

This is the thing that escapes most men.

Why is a slop-monger even in a group literally called “Fuck AI”?!

Piss off, sea lion.

No it absolutely isn’t, and this hot take marks you as someone very obviously completely ignorant of photography.

At its very best, slop creation is art direction. And most of it doesn’t even reach that level of artistry.

It’s slop. Pure and simple. Anybody calling it art is an ignorant jackass.

Oh no! A man has blocked a group he’s not supposed to be talking in anyway! WHATEVER WILL WE DO!?!?!

Oh. Right. Celebrate one less manbaby.

This one is staying with me for when judgmental assholes around me speak.

Are you OK? Are you smelling burned toast? Did you happen to read rule #4?

Someone else didn’t read the rules, or else he would have known the forum is not unrestricted.

How dare a mere WOMAN tell a MAN off for breaking the rules?

Live with it, manchild.

The victims of dark marketing. The message is everywhere: AI is inevitable. And people who aren’t with it are like (the fictional version of) the Luddites.

Instead of, you know, people who can do arithmetic and see that this round of AI will be dead by the end of 2027, likely, and definitely before 2030.

No it is not OK to weigh in. Rule #1 should have told you that.

But you absolutely had to weigh in, didn’t you? Your male perspective is so all-fired important that rules are for weaklings, right?

Then is AI code creative because the human wrote the prompt or guided the agent?

Am I a chef because I ordered a pizza and modified some toppings?

Are you in compliance with the rules of this group?

Asking for now. Not accusing.

For now.

The MRA weenies and their spin-off cohorts will use any excuse to humiliate or attack women. There is nothing so sensitive that a manosphere manchild won’t attack it.

But it’s misandry to despise them for it.

I love that exhibit for shutting down the whole “you should dress less slutty” angle.

It’s not how we dress.

Oh God, what fresh new Hell is this HURD thing?

The example I like to use is “computer”. I can, with a perfectly straight face, talk about hiring junior computers, reporting to senior computers, and talk salaries, benefits, working hours, etc. And I’d be “right” … except that in modern contexts that’s not what anybody means when they say “computer”. They mean what used to be called “electronic computers” specifically to distinguish them from human ones.

Anybody insisting that human “computers” are meaningfully included in modern non-practitioner conversations about computers is being just as disingenuous as the people talking about how “AI” is used in tomography when non-practitioners converse about AI. That’s not what people are talking about, and the person bringing it up knows full well this is the case; they’re being disingenuous and deflecting, not smart.

I wish I could claim credit for it, but I saw someone else using it and thought “perfect!”.

They’re philanthropists, really. They want to spread the money generation around. It wouldn’t suit their sense of fair play to use their AI to outperform every other company out there without giving them a fighting chance. It’s very ethical, really.

</s> ← tragic that this is needed, but this is the Internet.

Eine Flugschülerin landete erfolgreich ein Flugzeug, nachdem ihr Fluglehrer mitten im Flug in den Tod gesprungen war. Sie sagte, ihr Fluglehrer habe ihr noch gesagt: „Du weißt, was zu tun ist“, bevor er aus dem Flugzeug sprang.

Oh, look! It is equally clear here that the student was a woman and the instructor was a man! It seems that you can’t really hide behind German as an excuse, can you? Or did I mistranslate this badly? (I’m a bit rusty in German.)

Here is a little bit of a tip: if your grasp of a language is weak, perhaps you shouldn’t comment on the clarity of speech of a native speaker of said language. It really isn’t a good look. It’s pretty much why I won’t correct or criticize the grammar of French or Mandarin speakers because, well, my command of these is not strong enough to be certain.

*sigh*

Why are people so smart on technology so stupid on communication?

Context is king in communication. Consider the several different meanings of the word “bank”. How do you distinguish between them in “I will bank my plane over the river’s bank on my way to the bank”?

Context.

In current conversational context, when people talk about AI, they’re not talking about:

• perceptrons (later rebranded to neural networks because that gives you that sweet grant money)
• generalized portrait methods (now called support vector machines because USSR terminology is icky)
• mechanized significance (now called pattern recognition)
• heuristic classification systems (now called symbolic AI or expert systems)
• augmented transition networks (now called NLP)
• genetic algorithms (now called evolutionary computation)
• or a cast of thousands

They call these various things “image recognition software” or “translation software” or other such terms because both the term “AI” has come in and out of fashion over the decades since the '40s, and because the technology has found its niches where it is useful and calling it “AI” at that point is just confusing to anybody but a practitioner of the field.

No, today, when people are talking about AI, they’re talking specifically about (de)generative AI software, LLMbeciles in particular, and people who try to bring up all these other technologies that were once called AI come across as pretty disingenuous to most of the population.

Doing anything while in shock is no simple feat. It’s almost as if militaries have entire multi-week to multi-month long training procedures to work around that … that are still largely ineffective on first contact.