galanthus

Well, I sincerely doubt people in any western country were particularly fond of black people at the time. However, the country you are from is hardly important.

The point is, that the views that prompt you to call these people nazis were also held by people that dealt with the nazis.

80 years ago, most people in your country did not have a much more favourable view of black people.

The word "fascist" does not mean "person I do not like".

This doesn't make any sense. My person has nothing to do with this.

Well, Camus and Sartre are not exactly about finding meaning, but dealing with the world with no inherent meaning.

No advice here, but I suppose it would be rather difficult to argue for objective meaning of life under atheism, which seems prevalent here on lemmy, so I would consider the feasibility of the existentialist project, in creating meaning or living with the condradiction between our desire of meaning and the meaningless world.

A right wing European is also a little too right wing for Lemmy.

If the company fails, the responsibility for that is not on the workers. Why would they care if it does, if they can just extract all of the money for themselves?

The responsibility for managing the company should be on the people that are responsible for the company itself.

This is not to say, that they should not be represented in decisionmaking, they probably should, but since they do not own the organisations that employ them, they have no right to dictate how they should be run.

If I had tatoos that ugly I would seriously consider becoming one.

I usually do elaborate on my points, but you said you were tired of reductive statements, so I thought it would be funny if I made one.

I did provide some insight, by responding to someone that replied to my comment. Feel free to read it.

No, I am not. AI art is "art" made by AI, and I would say nothing more. The point of it is to minimise the necessity for humans to make creative decisions, but that is what art is, essentially, so I can hardly call it art.

There is no medium that tries to eliminate itself as a medium like AI. Whatever medium you pick, it is accepted that it will be reflected in the finished product, that is the point of a medium. But AI "works" only have a distinct look by accident, as AI is a program that imitates already existing things, insofar as the product is distinct from actual art, it fails, so the idea of AI as a medium is paradoxical.

For that reason, I believe it ultimately to be a waste of time. If your end goal is to make something indistinguishable from what already exists, you will only produce an inferior version.

But to answer your question, no, AI can be used as a medium for art, but only in a meta sense in which both it, and what it produces, are part of the picture. Otherwise, I would say, AI art is not art.