daniskarma

Not it's not. All the artists I follow keep doing art as usual.

Same as I said other user. If that's your concern, live by it. If in X number or years other forms of art keep existing and AI have not taken over everything promise yourself that you will change your mind and admit that your were wrong. Think about the people that told you that was going to happen and stop trusting them.

I have promised myself that if in 5-10 hears AI have taken over art and all traditional art is dead and all art is bad I would do the same.

Because learning from our mistakes is the only way to move forward.

Here you are making a big assumption "AI will take over". Just promise yourself that that assumption being correct or incorrect will have moral consequences for your future self.

I say this because I'm very certain that that prediction will not occur. But sadly people who made that prediction and bullied all over the place anyone liking AI will keep being the same once proven wrong.

Tell me. In which year I will be unable to read a book written by a person, read a comic made with digital painting, look at a oil handmade painting or look at a composite photography?

I'm pirating any game made by any producer that oppose SKG.

If they want to antagonize consumers. Consumers will be their enemies.

You are trying to analyze a joke my dude. Refer to the other, more serious, comment you replied a few minutes ago if you want real conversation.

Human input is still needed. As far as I know there's not a skynet level AI doing things by itself.

Human interaction is indispensable in AI creation. And it can be far more involved that other forms of art. A person can take more time and effort producing an AI image than in making something quickly in Photoshop/Gimp.

Speed argument is invalidated by photography which can produce images faster than AI so... A photography can be taken in fractions of a second, AI usually takes more time. The difference on time between a oil portrait and a photography is far greater than whatever we have now with AI, and people still have hand made portraits. I have one of myself.

Anyway, I suppose you are subduing your opinion to that prediction. Then I just hope that if the prediction proves false, and if in the future AI have not destroyed other forms of art then your opinion will change and you will recognize you were wrong. I obviously accept the same proposal if in the future AI art have destroyed other forms of art then I'll had to admit I was wrong.

Date a 30 yo that looks like they are in their 60s for true shock value.

I chatted with a homeless guy who told me how he ended like that.

He apparently hooked up with a girl from certain group/clan and the family clan of the girl put a "kill on sight" mark on the guy, so if he was seen by a member of the clan he would be killed.

So the guy ran away, and started to live on the streets out of fear of ever being caught.

(speaks incredibly loudly in a public space)

The way some websites just guess your language via IP geolocation infuriates me.

People with a lot of money doesn't really want just money. They want power to impose their views over the rest. Money is just a mean to do so.

Buying drugs and gooner games. That's the satoshi dream.

I wish I could go to bed early. But noisy neighbours make it impossible.

I basically need them to go to sleep before I can go to sleep.

Also consider that you may be the imperfect ally.

Maybe you are on the wrong about something and the other person you think they are imperfect are on the right. One of the things about being open-minded is precisely having the mind open to different ideas (all within reason of course).

I too have been seeing a tendency of left wing fundamentalism where there less and less room to discuss anything each year. I don't think that's healthy. I get that's a defense mechanism to cope with far-right rise, but I think it is a mistake.

I think the thing that made left wing the intellectual's choice and the best choice it's that it's funded on reason and not in indiscutible and inamovible dogmas. In order to keep it this way there need to be giggle room, there need to be people who differ in some topics, there need to be variety, there need to be different opinions from different environments and different social backgrounds.

And it's not that because they are different they are wrong. They might as well be right and you are the one on the wrong. The purest dogma may be wrong. That's why diversity is needed. Without diversity a bad dogma will never get questioned, and thus never will change to something better.

Once again. All within reason, I'm not saying to tolerate the intolerant. I'm saying that not everyone who has a slightly different way of thinking is an intolerant fascist neo-hotler.

So I say. Accept the different but not only with the hope of "converting" them. Accept them because overall you have more in common and because you love people having different ways of seeing the world.

If you do it with the idea of "converting" them I think things are going to go badly. Just accept them, they may convert or you may convert or no one may convert and you both keep coexisting without having to agree 100% on everything. And that's fine.