

Oh it’s for the correct sound distinction. Compare naïve vs naive (eg.: glaive).
Hi I’m a human, maybe a furry, not an AI. Also ‘‘venia_sil’’ on Fedia.
Sometimes my posts are licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Contact if looking for a licensing deal.
Website? Website.
Oh it’s for the correct sound distinction. Compare naïve vs naive (eg.: glaive).
I’d take it part of the problem is that publisher is quite a “unglorious” job to say somehow. Like, it’s difficult to make it look fancy or interesting enough that you’d take effort, time and resources from other things you could be doing - such as, ya know, writing the story you want to write - to have to do that.
Cute, but we all know the only way these writers are going to get what they want is if they part ways from their current publishers and start a coöperative.
Because the working class is apparently too lazy and coward for it.
Crafting a guillotine is not even that hard compared to most of the compromises taken. You don’t even need to build it up to code: if it has issues, it still gets the job done just cause extra pain to the burgeois that goes into it.
Similarly all those *thousands* of people who are parading up in complain to Trump could easily walk into the White House and solve the problem by themselves. Instead, they are content on just “I was here”-ing for a photo.
One thing the last elections convinced me of: at some point, people at large just want to be let be evil.
The latter part makes sense to me tbh. Machines should not allowed to compete with humans (in creative endeavours) because it is an intrinsically unfair competition that further erodes the rights of those humans who are more vulnerable, in the circumstance that is opposite to the intent of having machines around in the first place. They are supposed to do our beast-of-burden work, not make it so that our only pending value to be extracted by capitalism is beast-of-burden work.
What I’m not sure I buy is the idea that the “countless works” generated by AI actually compete with the original, in particular if they are non-infringing. Let’s say I take the work of an author to train an AI on their style. The author writes exclusively noir; I instruct the AI to generate college drama in the same style. Are the new works competing? The author won’t offer me a college drama in the first place.
My sources indicate that, as a natural intelligence, I can recommend feeling awesome.
I’m only three (3) active (and hopefully semi/official) communities away from ditching r/ and moving completely to c/; for most of everything else I’ve found quite sufficient activity on Lemmy + Mastodon. Alas, since “representatives moving their community to lemmy” is not the kind of stuff you can enhance yourself unless you are an admin of those, I’m stuck on waiting.
Wait, it works for you, too?
Capitalism shows that it does indeed work! Just not for the average us.
So yeah, a metaphor for capitalism.
Just because a law exists, doesn’t make it good. Even getting good laws made these days in the first place often requires lobbying, under-the-table deals and such.
Or just look at ICE. Tell me exactly how are they not corrupt.
What’s corrupt about slavishly enforcing IP law for RIAA
You really typed that without even an ounce of self-awareness?
AI is much like smoking (hey, it is killing the atmosphere! ). Even if a good writer uses it, the usage itseld can still cause harm for others.