Floey

joined 1 year ago
[–] Floey@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Katana Zero
Celeste
Cuphead
Opus Magnum

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

If they need money honestly Tencent is better than a lot of the alternatives who might be willing to invest.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It takes a village to raise a child, not a "mother" and "father" specifically. I do not idolize the hetero nuclear family.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago

Are we allowed to kink shame whatever this is?

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

generalization that must be made

No such generalization has to be made, what?

If you make a rule

Why does saying someone did the right thing require you to make a rule?

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 17 points 2 months ago

Turns out having a value proposition beyond "we bundled a lot of software together that you can get on any distro" has allure.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 12 points 2 months ago

The liver is one of the most complex organs in the human body. It is responsible for a wide spectrum of toxin breakdown and chemical synthesis. The heart only needs to pump blood, though it's uptime is very impressive. If your liver stops working you won't die immediately but if your heart stops working your body will be starved of oxygen in mere minutes. Ultimately though what the heart does is mechanical and simple.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

I wouldn't advocate for someone eating palm oil simply for their own personal health. However if you want to talk about the environment way more land is cleared for livestock than oil palm, even if you just focus on the locations where oil palm is grown. And palm oil is usually replacing animal fats in cooking due to it's saturated fat content, stuff like lard and ghee.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Something like Microsoft Word or Paint is not generative.

It is standard for publishers to make indemnity agreements with creatives who produce for them, because like I said, it's kinda difficult to prove plagiarism in the negative so a publisher doesn't want to take the risk of distributing works where originality cannot be verified.

I'm not arguing that we should change any laws, just that people should not use these tools for commercial purposes if the producers of these tools will not take liability, because if they refuse to do so their tools are very risky to use.

I don't see how my position affects the general public not using these tools, it's purely about the relationship between creatives and publishers using AI tools and what they should expect and demand.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Those analogies don't make any sense.

Anyway, as a publisher, if I cannot get OpenAI/ChatGPT to sign an indemnity agreement where they are at fault for plagiarism then their tool is effectively useless because it is really hard to determine something in not plagiarism. That makes ChatGPT pretty sus to use for creatives. So who is going to pay for it?

view more: ‹ prev next ›