if you say so

see how obvious it was?

It’s just obvious from your way of speaking that this is a rewriting of history, yes you have mentioned some poor world building she has done outside of her literature, that is almost entirely irrelevant to the books she has written.

Calling her works ‘mediocre’ is once again, objectively incorrect and in my opinion (this is an assumption) is fuelled by your own personal feelings towards her.

now do a count per years of release and calculate how many jk rowling would sell if her books were out for the same amount of time?

or is the bible the greatest piece of fiction ever?

does shitting on the floor exist as a major plot point in the series? No?

you are letting your hate for a person obscure the objectivity behind the comments you are replying to.

I wasn’t familiar with that. When I wanted to see if I could buy ethical cheese I found one farm which reared calves with mothers, and read that although everything else they do seemed to be ethical, they did sell their male calves to be used for veal. That may have been incorrect and if it was, I was unaware.

The cheese was also extremely expensive too, like 10x the price of normal cheese.

Unfortunately - and this is the problem - it is incredibly inefficient to raise animals properly. Almost any ‘humane’ animal products that you can think of have very harmful practices embedded in them.

Firstly - the animals having the best possible life right to the moment of death would still allow things like lamb. Surely giving a baby the best possible life before killing it young is still barbaric?

Secondly - secondary animal products would still require harmful practices. For a dairy cow to produce milk she has to be pregnant / have a baby. Some farms produce ‘humane’ dairy which involves allowing the mother and calf to live together, but then it also requires them to sell the male calves to be killed for veal because… what else would a male calf be for?

And finally, onto the point of inefficiency. Do you have any idea how many chickens are killed every single day to supply our food system? You probably do, but you may be unaware of what that means - the Earth does not have enough land possible to raise these chickens, it is physically impossible and that is just one farm animal.

So the future of a humane world for animals either involves quality synthetic meat, or everybody is suddenly happy to go vegan, or more likely; everybody remains carnivorous and we continue to torture animals.

The problem is it’s incredible rare to find others that are willing to change their minds in return, so every discussion either involves you changing your mind, or the other person getting agitated.

A discussion in good faith means treating the person you are speaking to with respect. It means not having ulterior motives. If you are having the discussion with the explicit purpose of changing their minds or, in your words, “alarming them to take action” then that is by default a bad faith discussion.

If you want to discuss with a pro-AI person in good faith, you HAVE to be open to changing your own mind. That is the whole point of a good faith discussion - but rather, you already believe you are correct, and are wanting to enter these discussions with objective ammunition to defeat somebody.

How do you actually discuss in good faith? You ask for their opinions and are open to them, then you share your own in a respectful manner. You aren’t trying to ‘win’ you are just trying to understand and in turn, help others to understand your own POV.

With this perspective, is death really a ‘meaning’ to life, or is it rather a ‘fuel’ for more life?

If it’s the latter, then that implies there is another meaning to life. There is a circle which keeps the wheel of life spinning - but where is the wheel going, and why?

The ultimate death of everything, perhaps, in which case I suppose you are correct.

The meaning of life (to you) could be to: “Just be here because here is where we happen to be.”

It’s not that deep, really. Some people want to have an impact, others just want to chill. I’m just curious what people’s first response is to that question and so far I have seen lots of interesting comments.

Come on dude. Just keep doubling down until you can generalise. What a weak approach.

It makes more sense that a god is a creator and not a omniscient controller, if we could grow life in a petri dish and set the scientific boundaries for that life - we would also sit back and watch what happens, for good and for bad.

nobody is gonna convince me of anything now

This is part of the problem. If two people engage in open debate and neither of them can be convinced to change their minds about anything, then what exactly is the point?

I will listen to people and engage with their arguments, and remain openminded to be convinced. Life isn’t that simple and believing you know all the answers is naive.

If you stop viewing Jesus as a deity and start viewing him as just a really nice guy, and you ignore much of the rest of that book, then I think he is a good role model.

Strangely, all of the good things he said and did are ignored by the people that worship him.

Turn the other cheek - nope, let’s blow people up in the ocean just in case they’re doing something wrong.

Love thy neighbour, the story of the good Samaritan - nope, fuck anybody that’s not rich and definitely fuck immigrants.

If that is how you feel about AI, then you would need to stop posting on social media and probably even stop having text conversations on your phone. Stop buying things online, stop watching YouTube, etc.

Every bit of virtual footprint that you have will, in some way, be used to train AI / machine learning / be sold for marketing purposes.

I don’t think stopping your life because AI exists is the right thing to do. Those ‘other artists losing their jobs’ would also be fuelling AI wiht this logic, so we should all stop making art?

I’ll do it for £9!

I feel your response warrants quite a deep and philosophical response in return.

No reason to share my drawings

That depends why you were sharing them in the first place. It does suck that your content will be stolen and potentially recreated in the future - I have to ask, how do you foresee that affecting you?

Let’s go back to 2010, you share your drawings, some people see and enjoy them, and the world keeps spinning. Is that what you want to share them for, for people to enjoy them?

If that’s the case, then my question is: Why does that change if AI is scraping your drawings?

People will still see and enjoy your drawings, regardless of whether AI consumed them or not.

it will only be good to the AI corporations

Why will it only be good to the AI corporations? That implies that it wouldn’t be good to anyone anyway, in which case, there is no point posting them either way - but I don’t think that’s true. I think it’s good for you to share your drawings and get feedback, and it’s good for other people to see them. The addition of AI is a negative one, but it doesn’t remove the good, it just adds some bad.

That’s a great idea.

I think it would be a relatively easy problem to solve, I think being one-shot on the highest difficulty is expected, but making every enemy a damage-sponge is both anti-fun and poor game design.

Just change the scaling - damage scaling is fine as-is, health scaling needs to be drastically reduced. If a barbarian gets one-shot on the easiest difficulty, having it take like, five shots whilst also increasing the risk should be fine.