I can only think of maybe a small handful of positive instances of "porn in nonporn". For example, Bayonetta as a character is very much aware of her sexiness, and approves of flaunting it. Compare that to something like Stellar Blade, where the Eve is just "accidentally" super hot, with zero self awareness.

I agree, is what I'm saying.

It's not just profitable, it also requires most people in the west (probably 99% of people here) to realize there understanding of what a "basic level of quality of life" is is completely scewed by our immense privilege. Globally speaking, we are all part of the top 10% destroying the planet the most. From memory, a single american going vegan can make up for a families worth of emissions in a poorer country.

There's no amount of rich people we can eat or corporations we can destroy that will allow us to just live like we are at the moment. Nowhere close.

Listen, as long as I can find fault in any attempt at making the world slightly less shitty, I can avoid having to take any responsibility for my part in all of this.

It's crazy how long that misrepresented study stays alive. The point wasn't to find fault, it was to figure out how much comes from people in general. After all, nature does create it's own green house gases.

By the logic of the study, the oil company that sold Swift her kerosene is 100% responsible for it. By that studies logic me, you and Swift are EQUALLY not responsible for ANY oil we use, ever. That's obviously stupid.

The actual price is hard to really know, but I think training should also factor in. The hype of LLMs is based on the fantastical idea of continunous improvement forever, so you need to keep training. Even ignoring the hype part, you still need to retrain simply to update the data inside the LLM.

I guess we'll only know for sure after the crash/readjustment.

From his perspective, he's investing his free time and likely money into a project for people that are 99% of the time just leechers, as in they never contribute back and only complain.

Now he has a tool that he feels helps him deal with all that FREE labor is doing for everyone, and the very same people now want to tell him how to do his FREE labor he does for them.

I completely understand being pissed off by that.

Is this a good time to mention that animal ag is the most wasteful form of food we have? Further, consider capitalism and western rich countries. If the choice is between feedin poor people and feeding cows, what choice will the money make?

Der Hyundai 5N hat so einen Sportmodus. Da werden uber die internen Lautsprecher verschiedene Motorengeraeusche gespielt. Das kann ich eigentlich verstehen. Nach aussen hin ist aber daemlich.

I get the idea of hating this, but there's really absolutely nothing revolutionary about this. Being "undercover" is as trivial as "commit this, do not mention AI".

In the end, at least with code, it's the actual resulting quality that is the main determinant of what should be accepted or not.

At best, a boycott is part of veganism. Vegans obviously also don't personally kill animals to eat, or kick puppies, or have cock fights. Not supporting those things financially is a consequence of that stance, not it's sole purpose.

The reason it seems like a boycott is simply because for the average city dweller, buying animal products is simply the main way they interact with this form of oppression.

To try an analogy: Imagine most/all men actually not assaulting or raping women. But, 99% of them pay for others to do that on their behalf, three times a day. Feminism would look a lot like "just a boycott" to these people simply because consumption is their main point of exposure/support of anti-feminism.

Isn't that literally the last line, but for art? The average person gave very little fucks about "art" before AI, and most art happened for purely base reasons, like marketing or porn. Fancy shmancy art will continue to exist.

From my memory of their financials, they actually get enough donations for the browser. The issue is the for profit companies fetish for a million different side quests.

Well, the beauty of research is that you can actually do it, instead of spouting whatever nonsense that was.

If Bill Gates tells you tomorrow to not kill puppies, you killing puppies overmorrow?

Of course we would exclude a product from one of the biggest industries at fault for literally every single common environmental issue we have. Animal AG is horrible for everyone involved and not involved.

If they do, like they love to pretend to, then they are part of the people responsible for all the horrible things Trump is doing. If they're not, then why should anyone care?

Cool, and then there's NEVER any problems with different paths? With back and forward slashes? With the limit on path length? With missing permissions on the file system requiring weird workarounds?

Most importantly, your server is likely not Windows, yet you test on Windows, and that's never ever been a serious source of issues?

And don't say WSL. That's like saying the fix to using Windows is to use Linux, but fiddlier. Not to mention you still get issues with the mounted file system.

Ignoring prices, Mac is definitely the second best option after Linux for Linux-y development flows. None of my issues were huge, but still enough to ask for a Linux laptop for a replacement.

1. Very little customization, compared to Linux. I'm talking horizontal tiling window managers like Niri
2. Docker does not run natively, so you pay a hefty performance penalty with the VM
3. File name case insensitivity caused a bunch of Git issues

I've not had 20 kids, so now I get to eat a bunch of animals, and fly a bunch of private jets, and roll coal all day long!

Also, your decision to eat meat in a western country DOES actually cause as much damage as some entire families existence in the poorer countries like Nigeria.

Yelling omnivores is exactly as stupid as conservatives talking about this or that being natural or unnatural.

And in socialism, the exploitation of the planet for meat production didn't happen? I'd love to see any sort of data on that.

Finally, you likely pretend to be smart, at least much smarter than all the capitalism fans. Yet, you lack any and all concept of the material reality of meat production, or most production while we're at it. Meat production IS unsustainable at anywhere close to the amount we have today. Throw in environmental and worker protection, and you'll eat meat like caviar.

BTW, if in your dream worker collective, everybody votes to keep polluting the earth because they just can't give up meat, do I then get to have morals?

A "rabid" vegan turned me vegan. There was some thread on reddit about dogs or animals. It's Reddit, so obviously crazy claims and discussions happened. One was a typical 30 comment deep discussion with a vegan. I thought he was a dickhead, like all vegans, injecting his preaching anywhere he could, like all vegans.

That's why I started researching veganism. I wanted to prove to him that he was obviously wrong. Jokes on me though, because he was right. Roughly 4 months later, I was vegan.

I think non-vegans MASSIVELY underestimate the bubble they live in. What kind of vegan will ever reach the average persons feed or frontpage? It's not the calm, nicely argued one. Just like with the "angry, yelling, colored hair feminazi", the only vegans reaching most people are the most aggressive, most divisive vegans. That says absolutely nothing about vegans in generally, but everything about how filter bubbles work.

I can't see into what your experience has been, but I can give my own 2 cents: 99% of the time people say vegans are aggressive or uncompromising, the non-vegans are just wrong. Secondly, I've had many a horrible experience with feminists (and anti-racists etc.) online. Yet, none of that kept me from doing genuine research and becoming "woke", and I most definitely didn't use the terminally online versions of a movement as a indictment of the validity of the movement.