Sarah Valentine (she/her)

i’m in this picture and i dont like it lol

And having to live paycheck to paycheck, and the threat of armed, government-sanctioned violence.

Oh yeah? You think an AI would write THIS?

Fuck shit tiannaman square googly bear ants in your hair, go go gadget nachtmuzik, MIKE! MIKE GET IN HERE YOUR SHOW’S ON TV! And a sillawahow and a hootin’ burwati!

Okay, but they’re the ones staking their lives on Pizza Hut’s brand for their franchise instead of just making actually decent pizza under their own name and making an honest buck. I couldn’t care less about them seeing the consequences of their own selfish, greedy decisions.

They made a big deal when California minimum wage went up that they were going to fire every driver and use DoorDash.

Trouble >:3

It’s true, and it seems to be an unfortunate fact of the current state of the human animal. The capacity for and expression of such things as compassion and the desire for earnest cooperation is too new to humanity on the evolutionary timescale. Technology has developed much faster, raising the stakes of the periodic violence higher and higher. I hope the human race can weather it until the capacity for compassion becomes more widespread.

Correct. If you “mildly disagree” that using the mass-plagiarism-powered so-called “AI” is plagiarism from the getgo, you’re being an idiot and advancing the techbro oligarch agenda. I will not respect it. I will not have an overtly polite conversation about it. They are fucking destroying the environment and our living spaces with this shit. Stop using it. Stop defending it. If you disagree, I don’t want to hear from you. There’s nothing to discuss.

I’m not calling them anything. That’s just how the techbros view anyone who uses and defends their slopmachine scam.

That’s okay, you can disagree if you like. It’s not like you’re responsible for the creation, upkeep, and various abuses resulting from, this modern pseudo-AI stupidity. You’re just a useful idiot to them.

If that is truly the case, then it wouldn’t matter what anyone else thinks is or isn’t slop.

That sounds like plagiarism with extra steps, and it all starts here:

i then take random images from the internet

Then humans will work the land, and we can eat all three! This is genius!

The problem is you can’t solve certain problems from within the broken system.

Violence is that system.

It’s possible to go outside the system but without violence but it’s rare.

Thanks. It’s a lonely life sometimes.

The violence is what enables outside system fixes to be possible and those have been of varied quality.

To me it’s rather that the would-be fixers have just been tricked into thinking this violence is the solution when it’s not, causing their efforts to be short circuited. They might seem to get somewhere, but only far enough to satisfy their sense of victory or tire their whole generation out. Then the system which was never really beaten to begin with slides right back into our lives, putting the lie to the idea that violence was ever a useful solution.

I agree. I then surmise that earnest efforts to avoid periodic systemic violence are the doings of the portion of humanity which is both capable of utilizing their prefrontal cortex, and have had occasion to develop it. They are a minority, a condition partly reinforced by said periodic violence. We need more time - time enough to evolve out of it before we render the Earth uninhabitable.

But first they got tricked into thinking violence would get them to that point. Both failed to Solve The Problem.

If last time’s violence was so great, why did we still get this time? And every other time before that where violence bought a reprieve during which evil was given every advantage to regain what it lost and more? It has never solved anything for longer than a generation, and even then deals were being made in secret to preserve the evil, by the very champions of “good”.

An interesting take, but not one that can be leaned on to navigate daily life as it doesn’t reflect an understanding of how most people wield the label of “liar”.

I wouldn’t consider it in a vacuum. I also look at intent and consequences. Did they omit info to gain advantage over others, or were they refusing to tell a Nazi where they hid the jews? Did their choice lead to a better outcome for everyone, or did it cause chaos and disrupt lives needlessly?

Everyone going “duh it’s still a lie” - calling someone a liar carries a specific connotation which I don’t think applies in all cases of so-called “lies”. To me, a lie carries with it not just an intentional falsehood but an accusation or an accusable misdeed. I wouldn’t call someone a liar because they hid jews from nazis.

If you read the article I think you might reasonably conclude that this is a tool to help you learn just that.