So you can’t pull an image out as it went in? Because it’s not stored there? Yeah that’s what I FUCKING SAID! Stop spreading bullshit. Just stop it.

The insult is justified because you are spouting bollocks. Again. You CANNOT pull any of the training images out of a latent diffusion model, it is simply impossible because they are NOT THERE and if someone says they did they are either lying or spent a fuck of a lot of time and energy on making it look like they did. Either way they are trying to con you. Also the training thing - it’s no different to art inspiring human artists except the neural network in the computer is a lot simpler. It’s a new medium being used by humans, by artists, to create art. That’s all it is.

I don’t have the time or energy to explain any more of this to you. Again. Learn how something works before you comment again. Or just shut the fuck up for good. That works too.

No it doesn’t. It’s not theft by any reasonable definition of the word. No images are stored, no artwork is used directly to create other artwork. It’;s just not, that’s not how latent diffusion works. That’s one of most commonly repeated pieces of bullshit which has been refuted so often you would have thought it’d have got through a few of your thick skulls by now.

They are mostly known for having smashed machines and been terrified of technology. That’s where the parallel here lies, and what the term has come to mean. Whether they had good reasons back then is irrelevant, the anti-ai bunch don’t have now.

Apparently arguing in favour of AI art is pretty controversial, but then the anti-AI luddites are about as intractable as trump cultists, and their arguments about as valid, so fuck 'em!

Lear Welsh or French. They’re both Prescriptive languages where that is (officially) true. English, however, is a descriptive language which means the dictionary is there to record how language is used not to define how it should be used

Bit tired (had to get up too early today) but otherwise okay, thanks. How’s your face? Blended to a fine paste yet?

No, no, and also no. Try again? Or cram your face into a blender? Either is good with me

That would indeed be great but completely unrelated to what I said so I suspect you may have answered the wrong person

Oh you’re a luddite, you’re also a hater and about as intractable and strupid as a trump supporter. You can be many crappy things at once!

Hopefully this means the haters will shut up and we can get on with using it for useful stuff

It’s more powerful than nano, sure, but it’s also needlessly more complex a ui. Your use case is legit and that you know vi is a reason to continue using it, but it absolutely should not ever be the default for anything any more!

If I am forced to use an editor in the terminal, nano generally. But I very rarely need to because I have a functioning modern computer from within the last 25 years and therefore have a gui I can rely on. If I somehow manage to break the gui in a way that requires me to edit a text file (itself very very rare) I can fix it with nano.

Now, why would you voluntarily use an editor with a ui that’s needlessly confusing and convoluted, an arse to learn, and notoriously difficult to even save a file and close without checking help files if you haven’t already memorised completely random key combinations? I would say we’d love to know, but we already do. It’s because you’re an arrogant dickwad - at least that’s what your last comment makes you look like

Literally anything up to and including poking yourself in the eyes and trying to develop laser vision to manually modify bits on the disk platter

Because you’re used to it. No other reason

Okay… because you refuse to actually look at whether there are better options than the absolute trash you are using because you are used to it

Because you want to get out of your Stockholm syndrome?

Ugh, I swear vi and it’s derivatives are the absolute worse text editors going. There may have been reasons thirty or forty years ago, but now it’s just complexity and a weird ui for the sake of it

Peloton is introducing a $95 “used equipment activation fee” for bikes purchased from outside its official channels in the US and Canada, aiming to boost revenue and maintain onboarding quality for new subscribers.

Uh… what? No

Sure. I’ll keep telling others that too because I’m right