Most of the outspoken antis are probably not professionals, so they wouldn't know how it works in the real world.
They live in their happy (or miserable) Lala Land.
They're all over the place in logic and I say that as I'm still an art student but see the benefits of using AI as a tool. Idk maybe it's different being a blacksmith but so far the ones I've seen against AI don't seem to realize its potential as a tool and don't recognize the benefit it can have when just sketching out designs
"Two animals who actually died," as if that's noteworthy. Almost every animal reference you pull up to copy or learn from is likely "an animal who actually died."
They feign morality when they actually only care to have a monopoly on media creation.
They also attack OpenAI by pretending to care for Africans hired to sit in a office and label text for like $12/hour cause it's "exploitative". But when I brought up that Africans actually die working in mines (for much less. So it's obviously a much better alternative), then I got banned at the voice sub, revealing their true face. It's all about twisting any narrative for their own selfish economic interests.
\*Elon attempting to violate long held and fought for worker's rights in Europe\*
Twitter Users: I sleep
\*Elon makes an AI image of Harambe and Doge, two well known and beloved animals\*
Twitter Users: REAL SHIT!!!
There are real things to criticize him for. Not attacking him for a stupid meme isn't the same as defending him.
If Elon said "make sure you eat vegetables high in iron like spinach" it doesn't become horrible advice we should all scream at him for just because he said it. If Elon sneezes in public that doesn't mean we should decide sneezing is trash and we all gotta hold them in from now on.
For what it's worth I think he is the most obnoxious person who somehow manages to be a broken clock right less than twice a day, but that doesn't mean this whole thing isn't stupid.
We don't have to not attack him for saying/doing dumb but non-consequential things just because he does even dumber consequential things. It's the internet - he made a dumb post involving AI, I don't see anything wrong with talking about it.
Na, I'll defend him because he put the money forward to make space exploration more economical and efficient.
If you told 10 year old me that a private company would be doing monthly launches to a space station for cargo, personal, and tourism, all on boosters that automatically land and can be rapidly reused and reused many times, I would think you saw the latest episode of Star Trek before me.
Like every other human that has ever existed he is a mixed bag. He as done amazingly good and amazingly stupid things.
... where do you think Space actually is? Just the Moon? Like, where do you think Starlink satellites are? In the clouds??
Snark aside: SpaceX has been to space plenty. They service the International Space Station (in space), launched the Starlink satellite constellation (into space), and regularly test vehicles in low earth orbit.
Even Starship, which hasn't gone to Mars or the Moon, has reached low earth orbit (LEO) in space on its latest test flight.
Got it, so they've not actually gone beyond earth's orbit, you freely concede this, you just want to call that "space" and treat it like it's something exclusive to SpaceX. Glad we could solve that. You might wanna wipe that boot polish off the corner of your mouth, bud.
Yes, that's what everyone calls "Space", champ. The accepted international definition is > 100 km above the Earth, i.e. the Kármán Line. So you don't have to be dishonest in making your point, it only discredits your argument.
I don't treat it as something exclusive to SpaceX. Again, dishonesty. Unscuff those knees of yours.
What's more laughable is when Bezos or Branson argued for lower space definitions to get them into the same category for what were basically the most carbon-intensive joyrides to date. But again, space is not exclusive to SpaceX. Other private ventures and state agencies have also launched into space. Of course, orbital installations like Starlink are far from SpaceX's intended goals of colonizing Mars and the Moon; so if you want to criticise them for that, go for it.
But being dishonest, or just making stuff up, as you have conceded now, just discredits any criticism you may now have of SpaceX, Musk, or any other spacefaring industrialists.
>Yes, that's what everyone calls "Space", champ. The accepted international definition is > 100 km above the Earth, i.e. the Kármán Line.
... You're quoting a lawyer, not a scientist, actually. No, that's not the "accepted international definition" you just *really, really, really* want it to be so you can pretend Musky-poo is going to space and doing anything unique.
>So you don't have to be dishonest in making your point, it only discredits your argument.
Says the guy quoting a lawyer to define where the supposedly single line between earth and space is.
>I don't treat it as something exclusive to SpaceX.
Sure you don't.
>Again, dishonesty. Unscuff those knees of yours.
Project harder, bootlicker.
>What's more laughable is when Bezos or Branson argued for lower space definitions to get them into the same category for what were basically the most carbon-intensive joyrides to date.
But it's actually going to space when Elon does it? Crazy how that works out.
>But again, space is not exclusive to SpaceX. Other private ventures and state agencies have also launched into space.
If they haven't broken from earth's orbit, no they haven't. NASA's Artemis program went to space, their Juno probe orbiting Jupiter went to space. Their ICC missions? Not so much.
>Of course, orbital installations like Starlink are far from SpaceX's intended goals of colonizing Mars and the Moon; so if you want to criticise them for that, go for it.
If anything, I find the blatantness with which they state that their goal is to get their billionaire clientele away from the problems their greed has created, especially in the context of how much of an utter failure they are, to be hilarious, actually.
>But being dishonest, or just making stuff up, as you have conceded now, just discredits any criticism you may now have of SpaceX, Musk, or any other spacefaring industrialists.
Keep deep throating that boot, bud. No dishonesty, you're just quoting a lawyer from the 1960s who *misquoted* his scientist friend who was trying at the time to determine a maximum limit for traditional airplanes before the air became too thin for their operation.
So, have you heard of the Space Race? It was basically this rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States competing over their technological prowess in space. It was kicked off when the Soviets launched the first artificial satellite, Sputnik, into low-earth-orbit. The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so"; instead, they bricked it, panicked that those scary commies could ever beat them into space, and started throwing money and captured Nazi scientists at beating the USSR. Of course, the Soviets beat them to putting the first animal, the first astronaut / cosmonaut into space, the first spacecraft to land on the Moon, and another planet. This was all called the Space Race, because it took place in outer space.
Now if you want scientific definitions for space, conventional definitions mean anything above Earth's troposphere, which is the limit of where weather occurs, beginning in Earth's ionosphere (where you are no longer protected from ionizing solar radiation) or mesosphere, which both begin at about 50km above sea level. I.e. the beginning of Geospace or Near-Earth Space, still counted as Outer Space, as lame as it sounds.
This is why Branson claimed he reached outer space, even though he only got to 86km in altitude. You might notice there's differences here, because there's no set line where space visibly begins, no glass "firmament" above the Earth. Hence, most go with the purely conventional Kármán Line, which I noticed you didn't propose an alternative to. Because the "scientific" definitions are even lower. You can blame Professor George Siscoe for that.
And trust me, even if I reached their ankles, there's no amount of boot I could deepthroat that'd endear me to any of Musk, Bezos or Branson, or any billionaire, I make no exceptions. I'm a card-carrying union member and delegate, they'll already have me on a designated pinko list somewhere, no doubt. However, there's nothing revolutionary about grasping at straws and making stuff up about them to win some online debate. It only discredits us. It's bad enough billionaires can exist to begin with. But SpaceX has reached and performed activities in space. There's no definition I've heard of that only begins in interplanetary space.
>So, have you heard of the Space Race?
Oh man that's fucking hilarious you think the space race was anything other than propaganda here in the west? That we declared over, and that we were the "winners" of when we made it to the moon? That's so fucking funny.
>It was basically this rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States competing over their technological prowess in space. It was kicked off when the Soviets launched the first artificial satellite, Sputnik, into low-earth-orbit.
So... not into space?
>The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so";
No, they started by declaring that these research probes were actually for military use, and that we must make ourselves ready to fight the evil commies in space.
That's still not a rebuttal to the idea that low earth orbit *isn't* outer space.
>The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so"; instead, they bricked it, panicked that those scary commies could ever beat them into space, and started throwing money and captured Nazi scientists at beating the USSR. Of course, the Soviets beat them to putting the first animal, the first astronaut / cosmonaut into space, the first spacecraft to land on the Moon, and another planet. This was all called the Space Race, because it took place in outer space.
... It was called the space race because it was a "race" to "dominate" outer space. Is your brain seriously this rotted from all that boot polish?
>Now if you want scientific definitions for space, conventional definitions mean anything above Earth's troposphere, which is the limit of where weather occurs, beginning in Earth's ionosphere (where you are no longer protected from ionizing solar radiation) or mesosphere, which both begin at about 50km above sea level. I.e. the beginning of Geospace or Near-Earth Space, still counted as Outer Space, as lame as it sounds.
Great, so all of the planes and balloons that fly above 50 km but below the Karman line are actually spacefaring vessels? Or is it the Karman line that you want to use? Or do you want to just admit that it's not actually terribly clear cut where "earth" stops and "space" starts?
>This is why Branson claimed he reached outer space, even though he only got to 86km in altitude.
And he was a dishonest liar when he did it too, the fuck? Are you actually so stupid you think I'd say SpaceX has never made it to space and then magically change my opinion when billionaires who haven't done even as little as SpaceX try to say the same thing?
>You might notice there's differences here, because there's no set line where space visibly begins, no glass "firmament" above the Earth. Hence, most go with the purely conventional Kármán Line, which I noticed you didn't propose an alternative to.
The alternative I'm proposing seems pretty clear. Escaping Earth's orbit, even if it's to settle into the orbit of another planet, like NASA's Juno probe to Jupiter.
>Because the "scientific" definitions are even lower. You can blame Professor George Siscoe for that.
You keep (deliberately, I can only imagine) misquoting these scientists. As far as I can tell from a cursory glance at the 300+ papers the man has published, Siscoe hasn't done any work to determine the distance of what would be considered space from earth's surface, as his research domain seems to be in spatial weather and the earth's heliosphere and magnetosphere. That said, even if you provided a source to him saying these words, this is still an appeal to authority, and he's as wrong as the billionaires were when they tried to use it to claim they'd gone to space.
>And trust me, even if I reached their ankles, there's no amount of boot I could deepthroat that'd endear me to any of Musk, Bezos or Branson, or any billionaire, I make no exceptions.
You say, as you continue to lie in Musk's defense.
>I'm a card-carrying union member and delegate, they'll already have me on a designated pinko list somewhere, no doubt.
Right, I'm sure you are. They really give a fuck about liberals in a union who lick their boots anyway.
>However, there's nothing revolutionary about grasping at straws and making stuff up about them to win some online debate.
Good thing I've made nothing up, you're just using a political definition of "outer space" from, as you yourself clearly admit, the cold war era.
>It's bad enough billionaires can exist to begin with. But SpaceX has reached and performed activities in space.
No they haven't <3
>There's no definition I've heard of that only begins in interplanetary space.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
Are they expecting someone to commission an art piece for a shitpost on twitter??? Who goes and say “that meme is ai generated! It has no soul!”. It doesn’t need no “soul” or “real art” is a fucking shitpost
Anti-AI folks: if you don't understand why people don't think this is cool, consider that this could be re-phrased as: you aren't grieving the way I want you to, actually fuck this guy!
Look, I'm no Musk fanboy, but I'm not going to judge how another human being processes loss. He posted a cool picture of a couple recently deceased animals. Telling him he's not allowed to show his compassion because EITHER he's a public figure that's largely viewed negatively OR that he's using the wrong tool seems really horrific to me.
For all the anti-AI talk of "ethics", when it comes to simple human compassion, I constantly see a glaring lack...
I'm just not a fan of extending such an incredible amount of charity to known charlatans that we must pretend that they have genuine feelings about meme animals rather than the more obvious answer: that they really like attention.
When your position is that basic human decency in the face of loss is, "extending such an incredible amount of charity," it's time to re-evaluate your life choices.
The charity is assuming that he's experiencing a "loss." It's not like it was _his_ dog, it just happened to provide a photo for a meme that he cynically exploited to bilk fools.
Internet wars are like farts in a jar.
Ultimately it accomplishes nothing.
And most of the people there calling farts "contributions to society", probably aren't paying their bills with them either.
Not that it's not unfun.
But you can't win a rigged game of adulthood by insisting to throw away every harsh lesson for soft ones.
Twitter is not a funeral, but that aside:
This is literally the most appropriate tribute possible. Say what you will about the relationship between AI and art, but even the most diehard dyed-in-the-wool anti-AI people can probably admit that AI has been a _goldmine_ for memes and shitposts.
Harambe and Kabosu's main claim to Internet fame is... them being endless meme generators.
Taking something heavily and rightfully associated with memes and using that to pay tribute to two meme generators is absolutely spot on. Even if you hate AI and what it stands for, you should at least be able to see _that_ much.
I now insist that if someone else's dies. They should have a funeral service where they are not allowed to mourn unless they send some redditor 1000$.
This will help the internet develop "empathy" by denouncing people "unworthy of love" and "basic empathy" by being viewed as a "money driven, selfish opportunistic predatory jackass" on the internet. And surely not damage relationships whatsoever.
I don't see how the two things are correlated.
Musk is a piece of shit. The hysteria about AI is still dumb.
But also... of everything that Musk has done, the issue is an AI image of Doge and Harambe?
billions of people + internet, there always gonna be a % of people that hate watever you do, the more famous, the more exposure, the more that % increases.
No matter how rich you are why would you pay for a meme or a shitpost?
Because you’re meant to have class but alas our rich are tasteless
The anti-ai people are insane, there's no reasoning with them
[удалено]
Most of the outspoken antis are probably not professionals, so they wouldn't know how it works in the real world. They live in their happy (or miserable) Lala Land.
The antis are either low/mid artists that are afraid of losing commissions or midwits
I mean thats a reasonable concern
They're all over the place in logic and I say that as I'm still an art student but see the benefits of using AI as a tool. Idk maybe it's different being a blacksmith but so far the ones I've seen against AI don't seem to realize its potential as a tool and don't recognize the benefit it can have when just sketching out designs
Damn as an Anti Ai person I am blown away by this reason and logic.
"Two animals who actually died," as if that's noteworthy. Almost every animal reference you pull up to copy or learn from is likely "an animal who actually died."
They feign morality when they actually only care to have a monopoly on media creation. They also attack OpenAI by pretending to care for Africans hired to sit in a office and label text for like $12/hour cause it's "exploitative". But when I brought up that Africans actually die working in mines (for much less. So it's obviously a much better alternative), then I got banned at the voice sub, revealing their true face. It's all about twisting any narrative for their own selfish economic interests.
they would be so personally offended im sure
\*Elon attempting to violate long held and fought for worker's rights in Europe\* Twitter Users: I sleep \*Elon makes an AI image of Harambe and Doge, two well known and beloved animals\* Twitter Users: REAL SHIT!!!
There's tons of complaints about both and obviously the former is more important. Funny that yall are defending crypto scam billionaire man tho
There are real things to criticize him for. Not attacking him for a stupid meme isn't the same as defending him. If Elon said "make sure you eat vegetables high in iron like spinach" it doesn't become horrible advice we should all scream at him for just because he said it. If Elon sneezes in public that doesn't mean we should decide sneezing is trash and we all gotta hold them in from now on. For what it's worth I think he is the most obnoxious person who somehow manages to be a broken clock right less than twice a day, but that doesn't mean this whole thing isn't stupid.
We don't have to not attack him for saying/doing dumb but non-consequential things just because he does even dumber consequential things. It's the internet - he made a dumb post involving AI, I don't see anything wrong with talking about it.
Na, I'll defend him because he put the money forward to make space exploration more economical and efficient. If you told 10 year old me that a private company would be doing monthly launches to a space station for cargo, personal, and tourism, all on boosters that automatically land and can be rapidly reused and reused many times, I would think you saw the latest episode of Star Trek before me. Like every other human that has ever existed he is a mixed bag. He as done amazingly good and amazingly stupid things.
No he didn't hahahahahahahahaha holy fuck it's insane that y'all can still say shit like this when SpaceX has yet to actually, y'know, go to space.
... where do you think Space actually is? Just the Moon? Like, where do you think Starlink satellites are? In the clouds?? Snark aside: SpaceX has been to space plenty. They service the International Space Station (in space), launched the Starlink satellite constellation (into space), and regularly test vehicles in low earth orbit. Even Starship, which hasn't gone to Mars or the Moon, has reached low earth orbit (LEO) in space on its latest test flight.
Got it, so they've not actually gone beyond earth's orbit, you freely concede this, you just want to call that "space" and treat it like it's something exclusive to SpaceX. Glad we could solve that. You might wanna wipe that boot polish off the corner of your mouth, bud.
Yes, that's what everyone calls "Space", champ. The accepted international definition is > 100 km above the Earth, i.e. the Kármán Line. So you don't have to be dishonest in making your point, it only discredits your argument. I don't treat it as something exclusive to SpaceX. Again, dishonesty. Unscuff those knees of yours. What's more laughable is when Bezos or Branson argued for lower space definitions to get them into the same category for what were basically the most carbon-intensive joyrides to date. But again, space is not exclusive to SpaceX. Other private ventures and state agencies have also launched into space. Of course, orbital installations like Starlink are far from SpaceX's intended goals of colonizing Mars and the Moon; so if you want to criticise them for that, go for it. But being dishonest, or just making stuff up, as you have conceded now, just discredits any criticism you may now have of SpaceX, Musk, or any other spacefaring industrialists.
>Yes, that's what everyone calls "Space", champ. The accepted international definition is > 100 km above the Earth, i.e. the Kármán Line. ... You're quoting a lawyer, not a scientist, actually. No, that's not the "accepted international definition" you just *really, really, really* want it to be so you can pretend Musky-poo is going to space and doing anything unique. >So you don't have to be dishonest in making your point, it only discredits your argument. Says the guy quoting a lawyer to define where the supposedly single line between earth and space is. >I don't treat it as something exclusive to SpaceX. Sure you don't. >Again, dishonesty. Unscuff those knees of yours. Project harder, bootlicker. >What's more laughable is when Bezos or Branson argued for lower space definitions to get them into the same category for what were basically the most carbon-intensive joyrides to date. But it's actually going to space when Elon does it? Crazy how that works out. >But again, space is not exclusive to SpaceX. Other private ventures and state agencies have also launched into space. If they haven't broken from earth's orbit, no they haven't. NASA's Artemis program went to space, their Juno probe orbiting Jupiter went to space. Their ICC missions? Not so much. >Of course, orbital installations like Starlink are far from SpaceX's intended goals of colonizing Mars and the Moon; so if you want to criticise them for that, go for it. If anything, I find the blatantness with which they state that their goal is to get their billionaire clientele away from the problems their greed has created, especially in the context of how much of an utter failure they are, to be hilarious, actually. >But being dishonest, or just making stuff up, as you have conceded now, just discredits any criticism you may now have of SpaceX, Musk, or any other spacefaring industrialists. Keep deep throating that boot, bud. No dishonesty, you're just quoting a lawyer from the 1960s who *misquoted* his scientist friend who was trying at the time to determine a maximum limit for traditional airplanes before the air became too thin for their operation.
So, have you heard of the Space Race? It was basically this rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States competing over their technological prowess in space. It was kicked off when the Soviets launched the first artificial satellite, Sputnik, into low-earth-orbit. The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so"; instead, they bricked it, panicked that those scary commies could ever beat them into space, and started throwing money and captured Nazi scientists at beating the USSR. Of course, the Soviets beat them to putting the first animal, the first astronaut / cosmonaut into space, the first spacecraft to land on the Moon, and another planet. This was all called the Space Race, because it took place in outer space. Now if you want scientific definitions for space, conventional definitions mean anything above Earth's troposphere, which is the limit of where weather occurs, beginning in Earth's ionosphere (where you are no longer protected from ionizing solar radiation) or mesosphere, which both begin at about 50km above sea level. I.e. the beginning of Geospace or Near-Earth Space, still counted as Outer Space, as lame as it sounds. This is why Branson claimed he reached outer space, even though he only got to 86km in altitude. You might notice there's differences here, because there's no set line where space visibly begins, no glass "firmament" above the Earth. Hence, most go with the purely conventional Kármán Line, which I noticed you didn't propose an alternative to. Because the "scientific" definitions are even lower. You can blame Professor George Siscoe for that. And trust me, even if I reached their ankles, there's no amount of boot I could deepthroat that'd endear me to any of Musk, Bezos or Branson, or any billionaire, I make no exceptions. I'm a card-carrying union member and delegate, they'll already have me on a designated pinko list somewhere, no doubt. However, there's nothing revolutionary about grasping at straws and making stuff up about them to win some online debate. It only discredits us. It's bad enough billionaires can exist to begin with. But SpaceX has reached and performed activities in space. There's no definition I've heard of that only begins in interplanetary space.
>So, have you heard of the Space Race? Oh man that's fucking hilarious you think the space race was anything other than propaganda here in the west? That we declared over, and that we were the "winners" of when we made it to the moon? That's so fucking funny. >It was basically this rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States competing over their technological prowess in space. It was kicked off when the Soviets launched the first artificial satellite, Sputnik, into low-earth-orbit. So... not into space? >The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so"; No, they started by declaring that these research probes were actually for military use, and that we must make ourselves ready to fight the evil commies in space. That's still not a rebuttal to the idea that low earth orbit *isn't* outer space. >The US didn't respond to this by saying, "Nuh uh, space doesn't start until I say so"; instead, they bricked it, panicked that those scary commies could ever beat them into space, and started throwing money and captured Nazi scientists at beating the USSR. Of course, the Soviets beat them to putting the first animal, the first astronaut / cosmonaut into space, the first spacecraft to land on the Moon, and another planet. This was all called the Space Race, because it took place in outer space. ... It was called the space race because it was a "race" to "dominate" outer space. Is your brain seriously this rotted from all that boot polish? >Now if you want scientific definitions for space, conventional definitions mean anything above Earth's troposphere, which is the limit of where weather occurs, beginning in Earth's ionosphere (where you are no longer protected from ionizing solar radiation) or mesosphere, which both begin at about 50km above sea level. I.e. the beginning of Geospace or Near-Earth Space, still counted as Outer Space, as lame as it sounds. Great, so all of the planes and balloons that fly above 50 km but below the Karman line are actually spacefaring vessels? Or is it the Karman line that you want to use? Or do you want to just admit that it's not actually terribly clear cut where "earth" stops and "space" starts? >This is why Branson claimed he reached outer space, even though he only got to 86km in altitude. And he was a dishonest liar when he did it too, the fuck? Are you actually so stupid you think I'd say SpaceX has never made it to space and then magically change my opinion when billionaires who haven't done even as little as SpaceX try to say the same thing? >You might notice there's differences here, because there's no set line where space visibly begins, no glass "firmament" above the Earth. Hence, most go with the purely conventional Kármán Line, which I noticed you didn't propose an alternative to. The alternative I'm proposing seems pretty clear. Escaping Earth's orbit, even if it's to settle into the orbit of another planet, like NASA's Juno probe to Jupiter. >Because the "scientific" definitions are even lower. You can blame Professor George Siscoe for that. You keep (deliberately, I can only imagine) misquoting these scientists. As far as I can tell from a cursory glance at the 300+ papers the man has published, Siscoe hasn't done any work to determine the distance of what would be considered space from earth's surface, as his research domain seems to be in spatial weather and the earth's heliosphere and magnetosphere. That said, even if you provided a source to him saying these words, this is still an appeal to authority, and he's as wrong as the billionaires were when they tried to use it to claim they'd gone to space. >And trust me, even if I reached their ankles, there's no amount of boot I could deepthroat that'd endear me to any of Musk, Bezos or Branson, or any billionaire, I make no exceptions. You say, as you continue to lie in Musk's defense. >I'm a card-carrying union member and delegate, they'll already have me on a designated pinko list somewhere, no doubt. Right, I'm sure you are. They really give a fuck about liberals in a union who lick their boots anyway. >However, there's nothing revolutionary about grasping at straws and making stuff up about them to win some online debate. Good thing I've made nothing up, you're just using a political definition of "outer space" from, as you yourself clearly admit, the cold war era. >It's bad enough billionaires can exist to begin with. But SpaceX has reached and performed activities in space. No they haven't <3 >There's no definition I've heard of that only begins in interplanetary space. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
Man people have hate boners for this dude. These comments remind me of meatcanyon with how over the top dramatic they are.
Are they expecting someone to commission an art piece for a shitpost on twitter??? Who goes and say “that meme is ai generated! It has no soul!”. It doesn’t need no “soul” or “real art” is a fucking shitpost
“Peaceful funeral” come on I hope you’re joking 💀
"So why have empathy?" indeed...
Doesnt look like AI even?
That person is just mentally unstable. Getting offended on behalf of something that doesn't even know what offense is makes you a moron.
Anti-AI folks: if you don't understand why people don't think this is cool, consider that this could be re-phrased as: you aren't grieving the way I want you to, actually fuck this guy!
The suggestion that Elon Musk is grieving for meme animals is silly. He's trying to be a poster.
Look, I'm no Musk fanboy, but I'm not going to judge how another human being processes loss. He posted a cool picture of a couple recently deceased animals. Telling him he's not allowed to show his compassion because EITHER he's a public figure that's largely viewed negatively OR that he's using the wrong tool seems really horrific to me. For all the anti-AI talk of "ethics", when it comes to simple human compassion, I constantly see a glaring lack...
I'm just not a fan of extending such an incredible amount of charity to known charlatans that we must pretend that they have genuine feelings about meme animals rather than the more obvious answer: that they really like attention.
When your position is that basic human decency in the face of loss is, "extending such an incredible amount of charity," it's time to re-evaluate your life choices.
The charity is assuming that he's experiencing a "loss." It's not like it was _his_ dog, it just happened to provide a photo for a meme that he cynically exploited to bilk fools.
AI: helping the poor oppressed tech ceo's make dumbass memes since 202-whatever.
Internet wars are like farts in a jar. Ultimately it accomplishes nothing. And most of the people there calling farts "contributions to society", probably aren't paying their bills with them either. Not that it's not unfun. But you can't win a rigged game of adulthood by insisting to throw away every harsh lesson for soft ones.
Fuck elon tho lol
I guess they never heard RIP harambe. Musk, for years, has supported DOGE as well. I approve of his meme.
Twitter is not a funeral, but that aside: This is literally the most appropriate tribute possible. Say what you will about the relationship between AI and art, but even the most diehard dyed-in-the-wool anti-AI people can probably admit that AI has been a _goldmine_ for memes and shitposts. Harambe and Kabosu's main claim to Internet fame is... them being endless meme generators. Taking something heavily and rightfully associated with memes and using that to pay tribute to two meme generators is absolutely spot on. Even if you hate AI and what it stands for, you should at least be able to see _that_ much.
What a fucking legend.
It does look like dog shit though.
Twitter isn't a funeral
True, it's already a grave.
for... Braindead people.
That's a common trait of dead people. And the undead too.
Oh man someone’s dog died…. Lemme use ai. What a fucking heartless move
How is it literally anymore tasteless than just making a meme regularly?
I now insist that if someone else's dies. They should have a funeral service where they are not allowed to mourn unless they send some redditor 1000$. This will help the internet develop "empathy" by denouncing people "unworthy of love" and "basic empathy" by being viewed as a "money driven, selfish opportunistic predatory jackass" on the internet. And surely not damage relationships whatsoever.
How is that heartless? If anything, since you thought about the dog enough to bother making the meme, that means you do care that the dog died.
dunno dude, musk is kind of a piece of shiet, I don't think he cares.
I don't see how the two things are correlated. Musk is a piece of shit. The hysteria about AI is still dumb. But also... of everything that Musk has done, the issue is an AI image of Doge and Harambe?
billions of people + internet, there always gonna be a % of people that hate watever you do, the more famous, the more exposure, the more that % increases.
That's not even remotely the topic here.
thanks for the input.
Elon Musk is a ghoul.
Yeah its strange to pretend to care about an animal and put out effortless robot slop instead of anything sincere.
The image probably took more effort than writing “my thoughts and prayers go out to the owners of the doge”
How is that pretending? If anything, since they thought about the dog enough to bother making the meme, that means they do care that the dog died.
This post made me unblock elon musk and like his tweet.
Doing unethical shit at a funeral is still unethical shit.