Repost

[smiradenius]

16 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

No silver?!  Did the Westpark killer get you too?!!

I don't even know who that is.

[scoobdog]

3 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

 

No, it was against a corporation.

That just makes your whole weird ass lawyer bashing collage all the more not-interesting.

[Insipid]

Hmm, I did notice a shift in your attitude to Trump. Worried about social security and medicare? I actually sympathize with you if you are worried.

[scoobdog]

3 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

I don't even know who that is.

The important point is that you apparently figured out why hoarding silver is a bad idea… or you got robbed.

[smiradenius]

Just now, scoobdog said:

That just makes your whole weird ass lawyer bashing collage all the more not-interesting.

That's not bashing.  It's a simplified story board of what had actually taken place. 

[scoobdog]

1 minute ago, smiradenius said:

That's not bashing.  It's a simplified story board of what had actually taken place. 

So were you the stupid hayseed in that “storyboard”?

[smiradenius]

2 minutes ago, Insipid said:

Hmm, I did notice a shift in your attitude to Trump. Worried about social security and medicare? I actually sympathize with you if you are worried.

You mean the comic Ai?  No, I can just see the lighter side of him and I think that if the Democrats would just stay out of his way, he could actually end up quite lucrative for both you and me.  Did you know, for instance that he wants to reinstate the interest tax deduction for your car payments?

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, scoobdog said:

So were you the stupid hayseed in that “storyboard”?

That's right.  I was happier than a tornado in a trailer park when I got that settlement. 

[Insipid]

Just now, smiradenius said:

You mean the comic Ai?  No, I can just see the lighter side of him and I think that if the Democrats would just stay out of his way, he could actually end up quite lucrative for both you and me.  Did you know, for instance that he wants to reinstate the interest tax deduction for your car payments?

I was not referring to any of your AI-generated horseshit . . . and now that you clarified this, I don't really care to ask more.

Your city is home to his failed casino, just a reminder.

[[classic swim]]

2 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

Did you know, for instance that he wants to reinstate the interest tax deduction for your car payments?

After a man cums inside your ass, do you let the cum stay inside you or slowly leak out?

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, [classic swim] said:

After a man cums inside your ass, do you let the cum stay inside you or slowly leak out?

And how does that relate the interest rate on your car payments?  If you could deduct that on your tax return, that's money you can put to better use.

[smiradenius]

10 minutes ago, Insipid said:

I was not referring to any of your AI-generated horseshit . . . and now that you clarified this, I don't really care to ask more.

Your city is home to his failed casino, just a reminder.

Somebody else owned those casinos and rented Trump's brand.  Trump had to litigate against him later for too many violations of the agreement.

[scoobdog]

39 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

That's right.  I was happier than a tornado in a trailer park when I got that settlement. 

This has unintended layers, methinks.

[scoobdog]

24 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

Somebody else owned those casinos and rented Trump's brand.  Trump had to litigate against him later for too many violations of the agreement.

Is that what you think happened?  Who was this mysterious man?

[André Toulon]

55 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

Well, I certainly didn't buy a Mercedes or a ten thousand dollar couch.

You can't drive and spending 10k for your untrained animals to have a toilet would be dumb, but historically....I can't put either out of the realm of possibility.

[smiradenius]

20 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Is that what you think happened?  Who was this mysterious man?

I believe his name was Icahn

Edited Saturday at 07:31 AM by smiradenius
Spell fix

[smiradenius]

15 minutes ago, André Toulon said:

You can't drive and spending 10k for your untrained animals to have a toilet would be dumb, but historically....I can't put either out of the realm of possibility.

You're jealous, aren't you?  

[smiradenius]

[smiradenius]

[André Toulon]

45 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

You're jealous, aren't you?  

As green with envy as the fungus that grows in your wake. 

But nah, I would pity you if it weren't for you being so proud of your sub-level quality of life. 

On the downward slope of your life, your brother took the only thing you ever pretended to own and you don't have a single person that cares about you. 

You are a grown man who can't even take personal responsibility for your own shortcomings. If you died right now, could you name 6 people who would carry you to your final resting place....hell, do you have 10 that would even show up.

Will any of the garbage you've collected over the years be passed down to anyone, or will it just be pilfered by random passersby who see your door ajar after EMTs drag your bloated, and partly consumed by cats carcass away after neighbors finally complain about the smell. 

The idea that even a terminally I'll homeless man with friends would be jealous of you is laughable.

 

Edited Saturday at 08:17 AM by André Toulon

[SwimOdin]

The mysticism of packard is wearing off every time you post a bad image with what is probably the most banal idioms one could come up with. This thread sucks. I’m sorry to have to inform you this way.

[André Toulon]

1 hour ago, SwimOdin said:

The mysticism of packard is wearing off every time you post a bad image with what is probably the most banal idioms one could come up with. This thread sucks. I’m sorry to have to inform you this way.

Oh the thrill is gone quickly, but the stench lingers. Soon you'll either become Pooh and hate him or become me and can't resist cooking him.

[smiradenius]

5 hours ago, André Toulon said:

As green with envy as the fungus that grows in your wake. 

But nah, I would pity you if it weren't for you being so proud of your sub-level quality of life. 

On the downward slope of your life, your brother took the only thing you ever pretended to own and you don't have a single person that cares about you. 

You are a grown man who can't even take personal responsibility for your own shortcomings. If you died right now, could you name 6 people who would carry you to your final resting place....hell, do you have 10 that would even show up.

Will any of the garbage you've collected over the years be passed down to anyone, or will it just be pilfered by random passersby who see your door ajar after EMTs drag your bloated, and partly consumed by cats carcass away after neighbors finally complain about the smell. 

The idea that even a terminally I'll homeless man with friends would be jealous of you is laughable.

 

My brother did what, exactly?

[1pooh4u]

13 hours ago, naraku360 said:

 

The more important part was the director not wanting footage used for a negative review. Can the director just ban their footage from reviews posted to Youtube?

The answer, by the way, is literally no. If they put a copyright strike on it, it's a crime because it is protected by Fair Use and false strikes are not legal. Doesn't stop people, but it's protected. What we do all day, spamming memes we found on the internet, is quite literally more theft than what you're describing.

As for the pausing movie thing, I was getting at more along the lines of death of the author. Like you can't control the work after it's out in the wild.

The standard doesn't work when applied elsewhere. The plagiarism claim would not hold up in court when the result is completely different from the original.

That’s not the same as using someone’s work without the artist’s permission,  big companies are  creating AI making millions and giving nothing to artists.
The artist gets credit when movies are used for reviews. The artists here gets no credit no monetary compensation and how do you know what is created is different and unrecognizable to the original?  Not every artist is Nintendo stopping people from using their characters in hilarious ways like what they did to certain YouTube creators.   Or when Disney stops people from using characters. More importantly AI art is a cheap imitation where the person doesn’t have to have even an ounce of artistic or creative ability. All they have to do is enter prompts. It’s cheap.  
 

and you can control work once it’s out in the wild. You can get fined for copying a movie and selling it. You can’t use songs without permission. I can’t copy the work of an unknown artist and claim it as my own. Photos put on social media is different. Once you put that out into the public that’s different than let’s say putter works on deviant art where there might be an expectation that the work won’t get stolen. You give credit to the artist bottom line and if you don’t you’re actually a piece of shit. AI gives credit to no one. In many cases they get billions in taxpayer dollars for the project and still make programs that “learn” by examining data and images that aren’t part of fair use. 
 

https://hbr.org/2023/04/generative-ai-has-an-intellectual-property-problem

[smiradenius]

2 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

That’s not the same as using someone’s work without the artist’s permission, big corporations btw, because who’s creating the AI? The artist gets credit when movies are used for reviews. The artists here gets no credit no monetary compensation and how do you know what is created is different and unrecognizable to the original?  Not every artist is Nintendo stopping people from using their characters in hilarious ways like what they did to certain YouTube creators.   Or when Disney stops people from using characters. More importantly AI art and a cheap imitation where the person doesn’t have to have even an ounce of artistic or creative ability. All they have to do is enter prompts. It’s cheap.  
 

and you can control work once it’s out in the wild. You can get fined for copying a movie and selling it. You can’t use songs without permission. I can’t copy the work of an unknown artist and claim it as my own. Photos put on social media is different. Once you put that out into the public that’s different than let’s say putter works on deviant art where there might be an expectation that the work won’t get stolen. You give credit to the artist bottom line and if you don’t you’re actually a piece of shit. AI gives credit to no one. In many cases they get billions in taxpayer dollars for the project and still make programs that “learn” by examining data and images that aren’t part of fair use. 

Tell me where any of this was "stolen" from!  What was the template?  What were the prompts?  Do you see ANYTHING at all here that could be part of anybody's copyrighted works?

 

You're just pissed off because you don't know how to write prompts and get the results you want 

[André Toulon]

17 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

My brother did what, exactly?

Touched you inappropriately 

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, André Toulon said:

Touched you inappropriately 

You can't come up anything legitimate. 

[André Toulon]

3 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

You can't come up anything legitimate. 

We were all here when you claimed you owned a condo despite squatting in a molded tinder box. I'm not recapping this shit for you because you forgot.

It's Saturday though, and I got shit to do so here's hoping someone else has time to play with you. But I wouldn't count on it...you get boring pretty fast.

[1pooh4u]

13 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

Tell me where any of this was "stolen" from!  What was the template?  What were the prompts?  Do you see ANYTHING at all here that could be part of anybody's copyrighted works?

 

You're just pissed off because you don't know how to write prompts and get the results you want 

It has nothing to do with jealousy, which seems really important to you, no one is jealous of your unemployed ass, it’s about AI art not being art. It’s about AI ripping styles from artists with zero credit to the original artist. Entering prompts may count as art in the future but it isn’t today.   You sir created nothing. I am not jealous that you know enough English to create a cheap velvet poster knock off.  I am creative and I use my own mind and hands to create. I can write a story using my own mind and hands. You cannot. You need the crutch of AI to do it for you. So no, I’m not jealous. Just sad at the state of things where artists, most making near nothing, get their artistic styles ripped off with no credit whatsoever to the PERSON actually creating it. I feel sad for a future where any idiot, you’re the perfect example, can show pride in the drek created solely by a computer. You’re like a singer who sounds like shit if they don’t use autotune.  So no, I’m not jealous. 

[smiradenius]

9 minutes ago, 1pooh4u said:

It has nothing to do with jealousy, which seems really important to you, no one is jealous of your unemployed ass, it’s about AI art not being art. It’s about AI ripping styles from artists with zero credit to the original artist. Entering prompts may count as art in the future but it isn’t today.   You sir created nothing. I am not jealous that you know enough English to create a cheap velvet poster knock off.  I am creative and I use my own mind and hands to create. I can write a story using my own mind and hands. You cannot. You need the crutch of AI to do it for you. So no, I’m not jealous. Just sad at the state of things where artists, most making near nothing, get their artistic styles ripped off with no credit whatsoever to the PERSON actually creating it. I feel sad for a future where any idiot, you’re the perfect example, can show pride in the drek created solely by a computer. You’re like a singer who sounds like shit if they don’t use autotune.  So no, I’m not jealous. 

Yet, you STILL can't point out WHERE any of this had been stolen from, whether in copyright or style.  Thanks for playing. 

[1pooh4u]

19 minutes ago, André Toulon said:

We were all here when you claimed you owned a condo despite squatting in a molded tinder box. I'm not recapping this shit for you because you forgot.

It's Saturday though, and I got shit to do so here's hoping someone else has time to play with you. But I wouldn't count on it...you get boring pretty fast.

I remember this. What happened? His brother sell the place and kick him tf out?  Cuz I def remember him saying some shit that his brother was owner in name only and that it was his condo, house or whatever. Packard must be pretty jealous of his brother when he found out that owning something in name is the only thing that matters 

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, 1pooh4u said:

I remember this. What happened? His brother sell the place and kick him tf out?  Cuz I def remember him saying some shit that his brother was owner in name only and that it was his condo, house or whatever. Packard must be pretty jealous of his brother when he found out that owning something in name is the only thing that matters 

Aaaaaannnnd... WHAT did I lose, exactly?

 

He did everything precisely according to the agreement between me and him, exactly as I had said he would. 

[1pooh4u]

1 minute ago, smiradenius said:

Yet, you STILL can't point out WHERE any of this had been stolen from, whether in copyright or style.  Thanks for playing. 

I don’t have to point it out. It’s how AI works and learns you insufferable twat.  The person creating it would know it’s theirs.  
Honestly I wouldn’t rgaf but you’re acting like you are creating something when all you’re creating is subpar shit, even for AI. Like how do you even manage that? You fuckin clown. 

[1pooh4u]

Just now, smiradenius said:

Aaaaaannnnd... WHAT did I lose, exactly?

 

He did everything precisely according to the agreement between me and him, exactly as I had said he would. 

One, I’m not asking you. You’re a fuckin liar. Go drink a beer and stfu.  You always maintained that the place was yours, not his. 

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, 1pooh4u said:

I don’t have to point it out. It’s how AI works and learns you insufferable twat.  The person creating it would know it’s theirs.  
Honestly I wouldn’t rgaf but you’re acting like you are creating something when all you’re creating is subpar shit, even for AI. Like how do you even manage that? You fuckin clown. 

The template was a photo I took inside my own place.  There is no artist on Earth who can lay claim to any part of it.

[smiradenius]

1 minute ago, 1pooh4u said:

One, I’m not asking you. You’re a fuckin liar. Go drink a beer and stfu.  You always maintained that the place was yours, not his. 

It had been mine and I signed a quit claim to make it his, after the debt on it was paid off, as per the agreement. 

[smiradenius]

18 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

The template was a photo I took inside my own place.  There is no artist on Earth who can lay claim to any part of it.

This, is a side by side.  How is the later the same as the template?

[Insipid]

1 hour ago, smiradenius said:

You're just pissed off because you don't know how to write prompts and get the results you want 

 

Ah, the unemployed janitor turned AI 'artist,' truly a story for the ages—like if Picasso had traded in his genius for a mop and a midlife crisis. You know, it’s impressive, really, how you’ve managed to take cutting-edge technology and somehow produce something that looks like it was pulled from the bottom of a bargain bin screensaver collection. But hey, keep telling yourself that everyone’s jealous. We’re not sure what’s funnier—the idea that people envy your AI fever dreams or the fact that you think they qualify as art. It’s less ‘creative genius’ and more ‘proof that anyone can press a button and call it talent.’ Honestly, your AI images are the only thing in the world less polished than the floors you used to clean.

[naraku360]

1 hour ago, 1pooh4u said:

That’s not the same as using someone’s work without the artist’s permission,  big companies are  creating AI making millions and giving nothing to artists.
The artist gets credit when movies are used for reviews. The artists here gets no credit no monetary compensation and how do you know what is created is different and unrecognizable to the original?  Not every artist is Nintendo stopping people from using their characters in hilarious ways like what they did to certain YouTube creators.   Or when Disney stops people from using characters. More importantly AI art is a cheap imitation where the person doesn’t have to have even an ounce of artistic or creative ability. All they have to do is enter prompts. It’s cheap.  
 

and you can control work once it’s out in the wild. You can get fined for copying a movie and selling it. You can’t use songs without permission. I can’t copy the work of an unknown artist and claim it as my own. Photos put on social media is different. Once you put that out into the public that’s different than let’s say putter works on deviant art where there might be an expectation that the work won’t get stolen. You give credit to the artist bottom line and if you don’t you’re actually a piece of shit. AI gives credit to no one. In many cases they get billions in taxpayer dollars for the project and still make programs that “learn” by examining data and images that aren’t part of fair use. 
 

https://hbr.org/2023/04/generative-ai-has-an-intellectual-property-problem

Whether or not AI gives credit is up to the maker, just like any other form of art. AI art is just a method of creation. How it's used isn't universal.

I agree not everyone has the resources of Disney. However, this isn't a one-way street. Normal people traditionally would not be able to make something like this:

They wrote the script, filmed the footage, and edited it together. All the AI did was convert into an animation style resembling Vampire Hunter D,  which they credit as the source for animation. Personally, it has such little to do with Vampire Hunter D that I don't necessarily think the citation was even needed, but I appreciate it being included.

This is like the early 2000s copyright arguments about AMVs. I've always held the stance that so long as it is properly credited, I don't really care if all the components are inherently original. If I write and produce a scene that involves a song I like, I don’t think permission matters much, especially when monetary gain isn't a factor.

I've been getting more iffy on copyright laws with how often corporations abuse it, and if I like your song, then I like your song and wanted to use it for my own thing, and I don’t have the money to jump through a million licensing hoops to use a song in a video that either isn't monetized or where the song is a part of a greater whole, not the focus. I'm not even sure how much I agree with not being able to monetize purely based on the inclusion of another person's work if you're applying that work in a transformative way.

[smiradenius]

13 minutes ago, Insipid said:

Ah, the unemployed janitor turned AI 'artist,' truly a story for the ages—like if Picasso had traded in his genius for a mop and a midlife crisis. You know, it’s impressive, really, how you’ve managed to take cutting-edge technology and somehow produce something that looks like it was pulled from the bottom of a bargain bin screensaver collection. But hey, keep telling yourself that everyone’s jealous. We’re not sure what’s funnier—the idea that people envy your AI fever dreams or the fact that you think they qualify as art. It’s less ‘creative genius’ and more ‘proof that anyone can press a button and call it talent.’ Honestly, your AI images are the only thing in the world less polished than the floors you used to clean.

 

[smiradenius]

10 hours ago, André Toulon said:

As green with envy as the fungus that grows in your wake. 

But nah, I would pity you if it weren't for you being so proud of your sub-level quality of life. 

On the downward slope of your life, your brother took the only thing you ever pretended to own and you don't have a single person that cares about you. 

You are a grown man who can't even take personal responsibility for your own shortcomings. If you died right now, could you name 6 people who would carry you to your final resting place....hell, do you have 10 that would even show up.

Will any of the garbage you've collected over the years be passed down to anyone, or will it just be pilfered by random passersby who see your door ajar after EMTs drag your bloated, and partly consumed by cats carcass away after neighbors finally complain about the smell. 

The idea that even a terminally I'll homeless man with friends would be jealous of you is laughable.

 

Current situation:  Able to successfully resign and sustain myself without obligation to any employer.  Zero debt to my name.  My income is all set to rise by more than fifty percent within eight months.

It had been a goal of mine since 1973.

Edited Saturday at 06:20 PM by smiradenius
Added circumstance

[scoobdog]

2 hours ago, smiradenius said:

Yet, you STILL can't point out WHERE any of this had been stolen from, whether in copyright or style.

Because AI is not capable of processing a visual cue, as in a computer can’t actually frame or otherwise stage a visual prompt it can then convert into a processed image, it is inherently incapable of creating an image without “stealing” its prompts.  You don’t need to prove where an image was stolen from:  as long as the end product of the AI does not explicitly state the visual prompts in addition to your written prompts, it is factually stolen.

[SwimOdin]

Packard, less bad AI art, more bad political takes.

[smiradenius]

13 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

Because AI is not capable of processing a visual cue, as in a computer can’t actually frame or otherwise stage a visual prompt it can then convert into a processed image, it is inherently incapable of creating an image without “stealing” its prompts.  You don’t need to prove where an image was stolen from:  as long as the end product of the AI does not explicitly state the visual prompts in addition to your written prompts, it is factually stolen.

No, when the Ai is given a template photo that I had taken myself, I'm not doing any more than editing my own stuff.

 

Scroll up, look at the bedroom pic and you will see that yourself.

[scoobdog]

AI does not “create” art in the commonly accepted sense.  Consider this:  if a student sketching a bowl of fruit that someone else put in front of them, how does that student choose perspective for framing the sketch?  Assuming the student can’t touch the bowl or fruit, he or she still has to choose the distance, vertical angle and azimuth to view the bowl, even if it’s to take a photo to use at a later time.

i get the argument that people with disabilities can use AI as a tool to create, but that has caveats.  Aside from the fact it doesn’t show any mastery of artistic technique, it can still be art only if the artist creates the visual prompts (presumably by inputting only personal photos)  along with the verbal or textual cues.  Even if you use an art style you did not create yourself, your work is no longer art.

Disability or not, an artist has the obligation to stage his subject, define that subject by his own hand, and present that completed image without outside interference.  Expensive programs like Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator can use AI to help an artist overcome his limitations while ensuring that all source material is original, but those freebie internet AI sites do not.

[scoobdog]

9 minutes ago, smiradenius said:

No, when the Ai is given a template photo that I had taken myself, I'm not doing any more than editing my own stuff.

 

Scroll up, look at the bedroom pic and you will see that yourself.

You are incorrect.  There are additional sources being processed along with the photo you provided that you did not provide.  I can clearly see that the AI did not simply add brush strokes, the photo was restaged using an unknown outside source.

[smiradenius]

3 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

AI does not “create” art in the commonly accepted sense.  Consider this:  if a student sketching a bowl of fruit that someone else put in front of them, how does that student choose perspective for framing the sketch?  Assuming the student can’t touch the bowl or fruit, he or she still has to choose the distance, vertical angle and azimuth to view the bowl, even if it’s to take a photo to use at a later time.

i get the argument that people with disabilities can use AI as a tool to create, but that has caveats.  Aside from the fact it doesn’t show any mastery of artistic technique, it can still be art only if the artist creates the visual prompts (presumably by inputting only personal photos)  along with the verbal or textual cues.  Even if you use an art style you did create yourself, your work is no longer art.

Disability or not, an artist has the obligation to stage his subject, define that subject by his own hand, and present that completed image without outside interference.  Expensive programs like Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator can use AI to help an artist overcome his limitations while ensuring that all source material is original, but those freebie internet AI sites do not.

So, if you go to two hundred and eighty demolition sites, grab the scrap material and build a house, the new house is not of your own creation?

[scoobdog]

1 minute ago, smiradenius said:

So, if you go to two hundred and eighty demolition sites, grab the scrap material and build a house, the new house is not of your own creation?

Be more specific.

[Insipid]

Eh, what the fuck ever.

[smiradenius]

Just now, scoobdog said:

Be more specific.

Stained glass windows from one house, a chandelier from another, wainscoting from another, seasoned floor joists from another... until you have all the complete makings of a house.  It's still up to you to arrange and assemble it all.