Maybe don’t draw art that you want to own on there?
Do you refuse to throw a piece of paper away because the landfill then owns it? If for any reason the thing you’re trying to convey is private and you want to retain ownership, then obviously don’t use it, and it’s great for you to call that out so others are aware. But to vehemently dismiss some functionality because you don’t find the utility worth the cost is short sighted and childish.
Tuvo Tornado has been practically plug and play for me. Be ready to spend a lot of time designing, printing, testing, redesigning, reprinting. Not necessarily because of the printer, but just a normal part of the process.
And don’t be afraid to print part of a design and stop the print just to verify the footprint or general dimensions are good. It takes extra time and guaranteed ‘failure’ from a fully usable part, but much better than waiting a full 5-10 hours for a full print just to realize the holes on the first layer are offset, or the walls are 5mm too close for your use case.
It’s not cheating, especially if it’s anonymous. More like the same lines of watching porn, just a more personal version.
If you were sending them to someone for some other reason it would be closer to cheating.
If it’s just a verbal interface to a smartphone it’s going to be a waste of time. There are a lot of people who do feel comfortable blabbering their thoughts out loud regardless of their surroundings, but that seems to have a big overlap with people wanting attention.
If it’s truly ‘AI’, it should be able to incorporate what truly works for people, whether that means speech to text for outbound messages, summarizing long emails for inbound, gestures, haptics, anticipating time based tasks, to making up meal plans when it recognizes you’re adding random items to your shopping list and looking up a dozen recipes, and figuring out what alarms and alerts actual get your attention for things you actually treat as important vs the ones you mark as important and then snooze a dozen times. If it actually starts with AI, it might recognize what alert you need to see on your computer and what notifications it can wait to show when your on the toilet….that future is awesome and scary and will probably make some billionaires before it wipes out humanity or turns us into infants crying to have our diapers changed as it takes over everything else.
Maybe because you haven’t seen an AI first designed ‘anything’. I doubt they really have a sense of what it is either, but if they actually did take what is incorrectly, but popularly, phrased as ‘AI’ and built a personal communication platform from it, I think it would be different enough that you saying ‘it’s not worth it’ before having any sense of what it is, is premature in the most literal sense.
Mostly it’s because, information wise, it’s almost nearly “free” to take a design and duplicate it…bilateral symmetry is natures version of copy/paste.
With that in mind, it’s likely that non-‘bilaterally symmetrical’ organisms relatively regularly spontaneously develop it due to random mutation. Just like we often randomly find people with extra fingers or only one set of organs, over millions of generations, bilateral symmetry will naturally just happen. The difference being, extra fingers or ‘more than two’ organs rarely offer any evolutionary advantage, especially in already complex forms.
Millions of years ago, however, very simple organisms suddenly having two brain lobes, two eyes, twice as many fins, two gills, etc….for free (informationally) and at only a relatively higher cost energy-wise could have found itself at a distinct advantage. If you can both run from predators and towards food twice as fast, and the energy cost isn’t twice as much, you’re suddenly the two legged guy at the ass kicking contest in a parade full of one legged people.
Really is an interesting way to look at things. If you look at humans as an ‘organism’, it could be trivial to make massive shifts in output with relatively small changes in behavior. How to go about that might be unknown, but it doesn’t have to happen all at once or in one place. The fact that taking literally an extra minute of the day to deal with waste would double the amount of time we currently spend on it (at least roughly), shows what a huge impact just looking at this data in this way could have.
I think the point is that it’s difficult to attribute that to communism in any meaningful way where you’re comparing it to non-communism. Like if those 100 million people would have died anyway, how to do you say ‘it was communism that did it’ since maybe more would have died under the next most likely form of government that would have been in it’s place. How many people have died for Democracy, assuming that both world wars and countless other ones were fought to defend it.