top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 2 points 8 hours ago

I just use DDG image search. Started drawing a bit recently and use online images as a starting point sometimes.

Planning on carving a board game on a wooden board, same rules as the game of Ur but possibly going with a different theme for decorating the board. Anglo-Saxon runes, axes and round shields. Been drawing them on paper as a planning stage and to practice as I would draw the outline on wood before carving it.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 13 hours ago

    Letting insinuate the initiative is on robot? but in reality, you need to order or command it to brainstorm right? not to mention answering back for clarity and feedback. Opposite of cuck who have no choice in that matter ?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 12 hours ago

    What a wonderful image, might set it as a desktop background at work.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 8 hours ago

    Reminder: the term "bouncing off ideas" was pushed by AI evangelists to get artists to use chatbots.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 21 hours ago (1 child)

    Gonna copy pasta one of my previous comments because it's relevant again:

    I’m going to argue that how you use the lying machine determines if it’s slop, not if you use it.

    “Generate a character profile for Alexander the blacksmith.” Slop.

    “Ask me questions about Alexander the blacksmith so I can further develop his character.” Not slop.

    “Summarize everything I explained about Alexander the blacksmith in the format of a wiki article.” Could be slop, might not be, depends on how diligent you were about not letting the lying machine have creative control. Needs to be reviewed for accuracy of course.

    And for the record, I was a DM for years before generative ai was a thing. Running a campaign is ton of work, even with shortcuts. Don’t insult your DM like this.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago

    I’m going to argue that how you use the lying machine determines if it’s slop, not if you use it

    Which is ironic of Lemmy to agree with OP because it is also here in Lemmy, where i learned about making the correct prompt to get the best out of AI!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 20 hours ago

    Why use lot thought when few thought do trick?

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (20 children)

    There should be a way to acknowledge two things being true at the same time, but that way was never discovered on Lemmy.

    "AI is mostly bad" and "AI can be useful at times" are both true statements. You sacrifice nothing by acknowledging both, and thinking you have to pick between the two is, ironically, mentally lazy af.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 hours ago* (7 children)

    Most people agree that there are legitimate applications for LLM technology, like in the medical field. This comes up every single thread.

    Then you have trillions of dollars of investment on the promise of eroding worker power, and letting capital enunciate itself without labour. That's what it's essentially all for.

    The "legitimate" uses of the technology are not even a passing concern for investors except insofar as they can point to it to excuse their grift.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago (4 children)

    You say most people believe this, but I see many people every day for weeks now claiming Linux is vibecoded now. Why? Three stories: 1) months ago LLM use was not outright banned in kernel development 2) Linus admitted to using LLMs in an experimental branch to find and patch bugs 3) a recent shift in attitude happened, toward LLM-driven PRs because there were too many, and the reaction from Linus and the other maintainers was to raise the bar for submitting PRs to reduce the chance of slop wasting people's time.

    All of this was a series of level headed responses and course corrections which at no time was indicative of anything more than LLMs are useful sometimes. Yet people all over Lemmy are saying shit like "Linux is all in on vibecoding". Besides that issue, I've seen and been involved in many conversations where idiots will say that any use of AI is super unethical and unacceptable. The binary thinking on this issue is strong on here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 hours ago* (3 children)

    Ah well I agree I would Linux love maintainers to take a more principled stance against LLM contributions given all the negative externalities of the technology as it exists today.

    there's a strong case to be made that there is no way to use the current "frontier" models ethically because of how they were trained and who their patrons are. I would love to see that acknowledged.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

    So you are on the side of binary thinking, in the end. Cool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 50 minutes ago* (1 child)

    What makes you think that? I am on no side. I'm just trying to be objective. Everything I said is factually borne out afaik.

    Also

    you are on the side of

    binary thinking

    Lol now you're just playing with me, very funny ;p

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 44 minutes ago*

    You thought you were being subtle but if your response to an extremist viewpoint is "yes they make a good point" you're not getting it but you do seem to want to definitely take a side.

    "I'm just being objective but your point isn't worth addressing while the thought process you take issue with is totally valid"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago

    "Asbestos is extremely toxic" and "asbestos can be useful and irreplacable at times" are both true. So are "lead is poisonous" and "tetraetillead is an effective anti-knocking agent, lead in solder stops tin whiskers from forming, and lead paint is pretty".

    Also that's how racism got normalized again, after getting closer to putting it back into the cemetery of history. And so is every LGBTQ+-phobia you can name. Or even better: the tobacco industry, the alcohol industry, and the gambling industry all promote "responsible use" of their products.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

    Because utilitarians are amoral. In fact, the AI ethics "intellectuals" are usually utilitarians, as seen with "Longtermism" and "Effective Altruism."

    You need to realize that your stance is not going to be enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 hours ago* (3 children)

    But utilitarianism is a moral system. How can it be amoral...? Its by definition a moral system. You could put fort the argument that it can sometimes reach immoral conclusions, but calling it amoral is just... mixing things up at best and being disingenuous at worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

    Are you seriously considering people on the internet should start acknowledging nuance? Smh.

    I just want to be angry and right - and personally insult you; even though I know nothing about you outside of a sentence or two that I just read.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I didn't go through 8 years of grueling computer science and engineering education to ask an AI to do my fucking job.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago

    I was just reminded of Robot Unicorn Attack looking at this post.

    Great mobile game

    https://www.crazygames.com/game/robot-unicorn-attack

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 20 hours ago

    But like... in a bad way.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 22 hours ago (14 children)

    Why do they only draw the unicorns female. I’ve never seen unicorn dong.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

    That's not a unicorn. It's a whatever Pegasus is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

    That's because you're unattractive to unicorns.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›