While true, the majority of them (in terms of humans, not dollars) are merely capitalists of the "temporarily embarrassed" variety.
The thing about the 1% is that they're a really small part of the population. Less than 5% of all people are in the top 1% richest people. Extremely rich people may be overrepresented in EA, but I doubt they are overrepresented enough to beat all the prole EAs in a fistfight should they all suddenly become militant communists or something.
Yea but you (rightly) consider every act that doesn't put your creation as the highest priority a crime.
I have a lot of trust in ChatGPT's ability to make things worse even if they're already bad.
Look at me, I'm a philantropist! I non-bindingly pledge to probably promise that if possible and convenient, I can be considered to essentially intend to effectively donate up to half of my arguable net worth to a cause one might consider charitable.
Oh and a legal defence fund for unfairly maligned non-sex offender friends of Jeffrey Epstein counts as a charity, by the way.
Ah yes, "real" musicians turned their nose up at digital music.
Now let me tell you about how making music on a computer doesn't involve years of practice to become proficient. Using a digital audio workstation is basically the same as typing "club banger in the style of Avicii, billboard hot 100, high quality, big boobs, crisp production, lots of bass, danceable" in a prompt box.
I am buying it. I don't think @corbin@awful.systems is pro AI art, just that countermeasures like Glaze and Nightshade are not great either, and I agree.
Artists don’t care about this or need it to be.
I care about it. Some artists use Debian. Please don't shit on people who care about software freedom, even if you don't.
Making artwork unusable by exploitative machine learning models is cool and based, but using a proprietary tool that's itself made by from the same pool of exploited artists' work is less so.
I dunno, sounds reasonable to me. Just like when recent studies by independent groups of experts on fintech enthusiasts found that investing in cryptocurrency was correlated with up to 70% increased body odor, a statistically significant drop in attractiveness and between one and three standard deviations below baseline level of self awareness.
The independent group consisted of me. The papers are available if you pay me 350€ for a yearly subscription to my journal.
Shit, here I thought that at least buying illegal drugs was a somewhat defensible reason to deal in crypto and now you're telling me 99% of it is not even for that?
You're not making monero look cooler, you're just making digital privacy look worse.
Hah, look at this guy assuming you're invested in the most overinflated primitive buttcoin! Actually you hold some obscure shitcoin that's way better. You sure showed these haters.
I think that's roughly the idea, except replace "desk" with "penis".
Oh, so that's where the punching someone when you see a yellow car/VW beetle thing comes from. Interesting to note that of all the customs to observe in a social encounter (such as "don't suddenly punch people for stupid reasons") Duncan chooses the convention mostly followed by tween boys for the purpose of annoying each other.
Anyway, I guess the book fails to defend the undefendable, then? Seems pretty obvious, to be honest.