Now they don’t say hurricane anymore unless it’s sponsored by Coca-Cola. Hope you guys are enjoying the Big Storm.

The type of place where people describe themselves as spiritual but not religious.

Yeah it felt like the Bible and the white/yellow pages used the thinnest paper I’d ever seen

Oh I thought the sign was going to say “we have to sacrifice everything we believe in for the incredibly narrow issues going on in a single state because of the Electoral College, that’s how democracy works you dumbfuck” but my eyes are getting bad

That and all the people who say shit like “But I have to watch the ads to support the creators”, like there wasn’t 70 years of TV advertisements preceding this generation. I know I’m talking to a kid when someone says that. No one thought they were stealing from Burt Reynolds if they didn’t buy a Chrysler or tampons. It’s absurd.

FWIW, that father may have grown up with a father just like you. He just made different choices. Just like you can see that those are different choices. You could and probably will make different choices too, it’s the only way we ever change. It’s not by retroactively having perfect circumstances. It’s by choosing to be better each day moving forward.

Also, as a 40+ year old myself it’s always important to take a clear stock of the ways you’re similar to your parents (I find more every day) and also the myriad ways you are your own individual.

yeah I did this almost 30 years ago and could recite it from scratch, haven’t made a cable since hs

And 900 hours of AOL

Huh, didn’t even notice Russia wasn’t there. Been a fun Olympics though.

What they actually mean is rather “these two things are very dissimilar”, or “these two things are unequal”.

I think what they mean is “This is an invalid comparison”. For instance, the idea that two concepts are “apples and oranges” invokes the idea that apples and orange can’t be compared. But of course they could be compared as fruits (which would you prefer to get in line at the cafeteria? Aren’t you inherently inviting a comparison? I’m with you on that).

However, if one were asking whether golden delicious apples are better than honeycrisp apples and someone butts in that navel oranges are the best, they’d get the same “navel oranges and golden delicious/honeycrisp apples can’t be compared” response because they’ve brought up an invalid comparison in the context of the comparison. Apples and oranges.

Glad someone got it!

….Cherise…

Doubt’ll be the fire of your delight.

good to know that alito wasn’t part of a crazy partisan movement or anything

Are you asking me why is paint the way it is? I don’t know, take it up with nature, but stop spreading misinformation.

Red/yellow/blue are the primary colors for paints (as distinct from dyes/pigments, that’s CMY(k) and as distinct from light, that’s RGB).

What you’re saying is based on the predicate that the system can’t draw concepts it has never seen which is simply untrue. Everything else past that is sophistry.

Edit: also not continuing a conversation with someone who is hostile to the basic rules of logic.

Ok? Hundreds of images of anything isn’t going to necessarily train a model based on billions of images. Have you ever tried to get Stable Diffusion to draw a bow and arrow? Just because it has ever seen something doesn’t mean that it has learned it, nor, more importantly, does that mean that is the way it learned it, since we can see that it can infer many concepts from related concepts- pregnant old women, asian nazis, black george washingtons (NONE OF WHICH actually have ever existed or been photographed)… is unclothed children really more of a leap than any of those?

k

If the system must see something to generate it, and the system can’t generate things that don’t exist, then how is it generating pregnant old women?

The misinformation you’re spreading is related to how it works. A generative AI system will (without prompting away from it) create people with 3 heads, 8 fingers on each hand and multiple legs connecting to each other. Do you think it was trained on that? This argument of “it can generate it, therefore it was trained on it” is ridiculous. You clearly don’t understand how it works.