Laws don’t dictate morality and entrenching “being scared” as the basis for self-defense laws gives everyone far too much leeway in “being scared” of the black kid with his hood up, or the delivery driver that you got too high to remember, or somebody answering the door to an unindicated police raid with a legal gun in their hand.
Username does not check out.
Yeah, weird take that annoying somebody or even getting up in their face is grounds for execution. Get security, get the cops, whatever. They weren’t in any danger. They were just scared.
That’s an aggressive response. No wonder you agree with Scorsese. You obviously have decided what art and film are, and everyone elses subjective opinion (because it’s fucking art, not math) is wrong.
But really, the first comment, the one with more upvotes than you, is right. This is no different thatln some white dude telling you rap isn’t real music, and classical is the only artful form of music. And of course a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals will agree, because it makes you feel fancy.
No, it isn’t. Hunter is being charged with lying about drug use on a gun form. This would be Trump buying a gun with active indictments against him.
Are you old, too?
We can continue the music analogy again, if you’d like.
That’s a conclusion for sure.
you’re the one doing each and every brushstroke, deciding each and every detail as you draw.
Does Photoshop or any digital art not count? I don’t have to have the skill to draw a perfect circle?
good photography takes skill.
So we should artificially handicap the art at the expense of the lesser abled?
Whereas for AI art, all you’re doing is providing instruction to the AI, that then goes on to make all these decisions
Same as clicking a button on a camera at something that just happens to be beautiful. Does it matter if someone next to me is using the same ISO or exposure?
I don’t have to realize the complexity of lighting, shaders, or materials to render a scene in Unreal. I get to utilize the processes that pioneers before me discovered.
I understand the frustrations, but this seems stifling in the same way that cotton-gin-phobes, typewriter-phobes, and computer-phobes wpuld have stifled the ability of the average joe to accomplish something.
To what degree do you consider AI involvement to be the deal-breaker. My phone uses something arbitrarily akin to generative AI to sharpen photos. If I take a photo with my phone of something novel, should I be able to copywrite that photo?
If I use an AI generated image and spend 24 hours manually tweaking and modifying it, do I have a right to copywrite?
If I use an LLM to synthesize an idea that I then use to organically create art, is it lesser art?
It all seems so arbitrary at this point. It’s like a typist in 2005 arguing that digital word processors shouldn’t be used to create copywritable art, as it takes significantly less work.
Do you want to work for a company that will intentionally sabotage themselves? Probably not.
Uh, music is content. Some music has more heart than others, but I wouldn’t say that Target is disgusting because they sell cheap prints and wall art.
People get mad that Steam shows them games. It’s like loading up Netflix, seeing the list of movies, and yelling “look at all of these ads”!
I don’t think they were referring to fair use in copyright law. Just that it’s fair to use.
If only people were allowed to knock on the homes of cops, then shoot them and their wife because the cop came to the door with a gun.
As if it’s a decent reason to fire someone because they had a trans flag, even.
Taking a photo on my phone is literally pointing it at something and pressing a button, yet I own the rights to that.
An argument against the work involved in AI art is fucking stupid, and anybody who makes it is stupid.
Talk about how AI art devalues real art. Talk about how (as it has been popularized), it literally steals from legitimate artists.
The " AI isn’t really work" argument is stupid, and I’m tired of it.
That’s like saying you can control the sun for a photo because you can predict where it will be at a given time.
You’re the one gatekeeping work. Don’t make a dumb argument against your own dumb argument.
If the argument against AI is that it’s too little work, then Photography neesds to step it’s fucking game up.
If the argument against AI is that irrelevant companies get to profit off of others’ work, then say that. Don’t make stupid arguments.
Edit: Do I have direct control of the LLMs that Samsung uses to sharpen the photos on my phone? Do I not still own them? You’re yelling at clouds.
Sooo… some people need starlink?
From Wikipedia
Around the late 14th century in Europe, smaller and portable hand-held cannons were developed, creating in effect the first smooth-bore personal firearm.