Eccitaze

I think there's room for "Churchill was instrumental in the fight against fascism" and "Churchill was himself racist and enacted racist policies that lead to genocide" to coexist.

Yeah, before Tucker got his Fox segment, he used to do a show on CNN with Paul Begala called Crossfire, whose entire schtick was having a conservative and a liberal talking head co-hosting the show and basically arguing with each other for an hour. Jon came on the show in 2004 and ripped the entire concept apart so thoroughly that it got the entire show cancelled. It's truly a glorious moment: https://youtu.be/aFQFB5YpDZE&t=0

Trust me. Forget you heard about that. Trust. Me.

I don't think anybody is legitimately saying that voting blue is the end of the matter. Activism is way more than that--it's attending local board meetings and making yourself heard, getting involved with your local/state parties to push for change, communicating with your elected representative (even, and especially if, they disagree with your position), attending donstrations and protests, volunteering for your preferred candidate's campaign, voting, and most importantly--never giving up, even if it takes decades. If your preferred candidate loses in the primary, you immediately switch to the next closest candidate and start campaigning for them and pushing them towards your preferred policies. If a referendum you support loses, immediately start pushing for a similar referendum in the next election that tweaks the wording to avoid the reason why it lost last time. And so on, and so forth, across all the various levels of government.

This exact playbook is what got Roe overturned. Religious mutters pushed, and pushed, and pushed. They voted in lockstep for the farthest-right candidate in the primary, and if they lost in the primary they voted for the farthest right candidate in the general. They protested outside abortion clinics daily. They pushed and pushed, and over the course of 50 years they gradually transformed an entire political party from having roughly equal representation of pro-choice and anti-choice candidates to one where supporting a nationwide 15-week abortion ban with no exceptions is considered "moderate."

An actual technical answer: Apparently, it's because while the PS5 and Xbox Series X are technically regular x86-64 architecture, they have a design that allows the GPU and CPU to share a single pool of memory with no loss in performance. This makes it easy to allocate a shit load of RAM for the GPU to store textures very quickly, but it also means that as the games industry shifts from developing for the PS4/Xbox One X first (both of which have separate pools of memory for CPU & GPU) to the PS5/XSX first, VRAM requirements are spiking up because it's a lot easier to port to PC if you just keep the assumption that the GPU can handle storing 10-15 GB of texture data at once instead of needing to refactor your code to reduce VRAM usage.

Ah, you're this kind of idiot:

...who thinks that he's making an actual point by comparing actual creative expression to heating food.

You're also welcome to pick up a pen, or a tablet, or crayons, you don't have to use just a pencil. But maybe non-toxic edible finger paint is more suitable for you in particular. :)

I wouldn't even go that far. What's the line between commercial and noncommercial use? Lots of people commission artists for custom made artwork and reference sheets for their characters; if someone instead uses AI art to replace that, is it still noncommercial even if that person never once makes a dime off the AI art? What if the artist makes a living drawing memes as a way to provide exposure and attract commissioners (rare, but they do exist)?

For me, the only ethical uses are entirely private cases where it's never shared (e.g., an artist throwing out some ideas while looking for inspiration of how to draw something), and cases where it's exclusively augmenting human work--for example, the feature in Photoshop to extend the background of a photo to create a panorama.

Did you have an actual point, or...?

I mean, I'm not the one who had the unmitigated gall and sense of entitlement to compare the thousands of hours each of the tens of thousands of artists (whose artwork was scraped by LLMs without so much as a by-your-leave) spent practicing to get good at artwork to the... what, ten? twenty? hours you took to get good at "prompt engineering." Nor did I have the absolute nerve to then complain about how you have it SO ROUGH because you have to "fiddle with Photoshop" but all the mean people mock all your hard effort!

Hint: You're being mocked because you deserve to be mocked. At best, AI "artists" like yourself are lazily piggybacking off the literal millions of collective man-hours of labor that actual artists spent honing their talent, and trying to pass off the creative equivalent of a boneless chicken nugget shaped like a dinosaur as being of worthy of the same respect as a beef wellington, or at least a damn good burger.

I hate hate hate hate it, I'd be happy if they were all banned, tbh.

This is prolly gonna be a hot take but the only reason I don't block AI art communities is so that I can downvote them whenever I see an AI art post. Yes, I'm that petty, and no, I don't give a shit.