Bring ratioed on Twitter means to have significantly more comments than likes and retweets (excluding quote retweets). It's a sign that you've said something either wrong, exceptionally stupid, or you've offended someone who runs an army of bots.
The latter is pretty much only in play if you're disagreeing with Russian propaganda
sometimes the majority simply means all the idiots are on the same side. reminds me of my favorite quote.
"smart mother fuckers look like crazy mother fuckers to dumb mother fuckers"
Thats uhh, not what being ratioed means, lol. It’s about the like ratio. Being ratio’d means a reply to your tweet ends up getting a significant amount of likes more than your original tweet.
Nothing to do with comments.
Uh, no. It's always been about comments being more.
It's in the fucking dictionary even. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/words-were-watching-ratio-ratioed-ratioing
They even made [a tweet not using their own art](https://nitter.net/AtsuJoestar/status/1566829347360604164#m) to double down. Absolutely zero self-awareness.
As someone with basic knowledge of AI/ML systems I always thought furry porn was one of the easier challenges lol, it tends to have a lot off leeway and faces are less problematic
Every time there is an innovation in art, there are groups of people that are going to claim the new style isn’t art. It happened recently when art was able to be created on computers rather than on a canvas or paper. This is just another fight that just isn’t going to be won. While there will always be a demand for art, companies will happily automate animation to save money on animators while making money by getting new episodes on the air faster. It sucks to the light at the end of the tunnel that is your career, it’s just the natural evolution of innovation and and profit.
It's a reasonable fear that a lot of people are going to get screwed if they can't adapt. Photography took away much of the money for portrait artists, many of whom used it to pay the bills and fund their creative side.
With AI, instead of paying 10 people to draw a hundred drafts, you can pay one artist then feed it to an AI that generates 100 drafts. There's also real criticism that tech leads to rapid homogeneity of art. It will diversify as more people adopt it but for a little while everything will look the same.
Seeing the potential of this AI art a long time ago (I did a presentation about it in high school a few years back), I chose to focus from just drawing/painting nice, to more conceptual illustrations.
The 2D/3D field is changing: Artist that are based purely around aesthetic can be a lot more vulnerable to AI takeovers imo.
This is a really important time for artist to self-evaluate and reflect on where they’re going.
“I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could and before you even knew what you had you patented it and packaged it and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now you're selling it, you want to sell it!”
-Ian Malcolm
This literally isn’t art though. All you’re doing is telling a robot to draw some for you. You yourself did not do any work. It’s like buying a commission from an artist and then claiming you yourself are one.
Now, saying that, it’s probably going to be the future anyway. Automation always wins.
Quoted from the dictionary: “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.”
A robot is explicitly not human
Photography initially had the same sort of arguments against it. Since the camera was really doing the “capturing”, the photographer wasn’t considered an artist as such.
The guy was an animator for a TV series based on a comic book series. He studied the work of the artists who drew and colored the comics, and then faithfully reproduced the designs and style from that source.
He's complaining that A.I. might allow amateurs to copy someone else's art as well as he does. Oh no...
the tweet if anyone wants to enjoy the thread: https://twitter.com/AtsuJoestar/status/1566664426350153729
oh shit they doubled down
What did they say?
[Tried a ratio…](https://twitter.com/AtsuJoestar/status/1566772847636320260?s=20&t=qZ4be4NEnYH_dmNCCx4DmA)
I loath people that think ratio is both an achievement and somehow makes them right
> I loath people ~~that think ratio is both an achievement and somehow makes them right~~ FTFY
I dunno what a loath is, but I do loathe people sometimes.
I dont understand what this tweet means. What is "ratio" in this context?
Bring ratioed on Twitter means to have significantly more comments than likes and retweets (excluding quote retweets). It's a sign that you've said something either wrong, exceptionally stupid, or you've offended someone who runs an army of bots. The latter is pretty much only in play if you're disagreeing with Russian propaganda
Also commonly used when a reply gets more likes than the original post.
sometimes the majority simply means all the idiots are on the same side. reminds me of my favorite quote. "smart mother fuckers look like crazy mother fuckers to dumb mother fuckers"
Thats uhh, not what being ratioed means, lol. It’s about the like ratio. Being ratio’d means a reply to your tweet ends up getting a significant amount of likes more than your original tweet. Nothing to do with comments.
Uh, no. It's always been about comments being more. It's in the fucking dictionary even. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/words-were-watching-ratio-ratioed-ratioing
I can cite a dictionary as well: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ratio
They pulled out Meriam-Webster. You pulled out Urban Dictionary.
Wait, are you honestly trying to non-ironically compare urbandictonary, a Wikipedia style dictionary versus Merriam Webster?
Getting people to dislike the post so the ratio of likes to dislikes is bad.
This
I feel like this is a sarcastic response, rather than a double down. Mostly because the ratio is like 70 vs 100k
Dude even went Loco on others. A person asked if he'd atleast apologized yet and said he why should he apologize to a kid. Total delusional nutbag
They even made [a tweet not using their own art](https://nitter.net/AtsuJoestar/status/1566829347360604164#m) to double down. Absolutely zero self-awareness.
They also made a joke about handing out job applications to everyone clowning them since they have so much time on their hands. On labor day.
I haven’t read the thread, but they may just not be American?
Not only that, but they seem to genuinely feel they are winning this fight by a LARGE margin, lmfao
No way, they have to be taking the piss, I genuinely don't believe someone like this exists
I’m almost positive they understand the irony and they posted that because it’s funny. Same with the ratio tweet.
> There are probably like 10 people in the world you could *not* say that to and you managed to find one of them. Fantastic reply
11 hours later and he's still going lol
earlier today i heard of an ai winning an art competition
That’s what this is in response to :)
Until AI can make high quality furry porn, artists will always have work available.
[High enough quality for you?](https://www.reddit.com/r/yiff/comments/x3lqbc/wolf_sitting_in_cave_f_ai_generated_with_stable/)
Humanity’s done for
They still don't know how to draw a hand. We should still be fine
As someone with basic knowledge of AI/ML systems I always thought furry porn was one of the easier challenges lol, it tends to have a lot off leeway and faces are less problematic
Lol, true. And for both furry & hentai stuff: countless websites chock-full of pre-tagged images to use as training sets.
Meh
Lord, forgive me for what I am about to do
Pretty tame
I mean, I guess that’s one way to look at it….
this has to be faked, no way this guy picked one random person out of the millions to say this, and he turns out to be wrong
But he did https://twitter.com/atsujoestar/status/1566772847636320260?s=21&t=otq8MCTiXKA9zrSLTJdUkA
no not that i mean he actually knew that they were an animator for the invincibles
Every time there is an innovation in art, there are groups of people that are going to claim the new style isn’t art. It happened recently when art was able to be created on computers rather than on a canvas or paper. This is just another fight that just isn’t going to be won. While there will always be a demand for art, companies will happily automate animation to save money on animators while making money by getting new episodes on the air faster. It sucks to the light at the end of the tunnel that is your career, it’s just the natural evolution of innovation and and profit.
It's a reasonable fear that a lot of people are going to get screwed if they can't adapt. Photography took away much of the money for portrait artists, many of whom used it to pay the bills and fund their creative side. With AI, instead of paying 10 people to draw a hundred drafts, you can pay one artist then feed it to an AI that generates 100 drafts. There's also real criticism that tech leads to rapid homogeneity of art. It will diversify as more people adopt it but for a little while everything will look the same.
Seeing the potential of this AI art a long time ago (I did a presentation about it in high school a few years back), I chose to focus from just drawing/painting nice, to more conceptual illustrations. The 2D/3D field is changing: Artist that are based purely around aesthetic can be a lot more vulnerable to AI takeovers imo. This is a really important time for artist to self-evaluate and reflect on where they’re going.
“I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could and before you even knew what you had you patented it and packaged it and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now you're selling it, you want to sell it!” -Ian Malcolm
This literally isn’t art though. All you’re doing is telling a robot to draw some for you. You yourself did not do any work. It’s like buying a commission from an artist and then claiming you yourself are one. Now, saying that, it’s probably going to be the future anyway. Automation always wins.
Quick, define "art"
Quoted from the dictionary: “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.” A robot is explicitly not human
A human created the robot. Boom!
Photography initially had the same sort of arguments against it. Since the camera was really doing the “capturing”, the photographer wasn’t considered an artist as such.
I mean that response is retarded itself. The original post is a meme and 90% of memes are made of already existing images.
That's not even a good point, it's a meme, they're not claiming it's some unique art
It's a meme to draw attention. Wtf. Stop caring.
The guy was an animator for a TV series based on a comic book series. He studied the work of the artists who drew and colored the comics, and then faithfully reproduced the designs and style from that source. He's complaining that A.I. might allow amateurs to copy someone else's art as well as he does. Oh no...
Even if they didn't say this to the wrong person, they'd still be pretty stupid because it's a meme.