Not really, though it would help the environment. It would hurt them if people kept using it but stopped talking about it. The cost of running the things far outweighs the gains of any of their subscriptions, and the only thing keeping the bubble afloat right now is hype.
You should only use this license for projects you essentially want to fail in that way. If you want to ensure something you made does not get used for fuckery(say, for example, a virus you made for fun), you can use it. It’s a very niche license, but that doesn’t make it bad.
Bottom left is ave mujica I think?
I like this license. I think some people in this comment section do not understand the purpose. An (open source) license is a tool that is used most effectively in determining what kind of entity uses your software. Use an mit or bsd license and everyone will use your software. Use a gpl license and large corporations might use it sometimes, but wont if there are alternatives and most likely wont incorporate it into any of their products.
This license might not be fully enforcable, but it is 100% poison to companies. Using this license(especially with the copyleft module) will almost certainly guarantee that only small projects will ever use it. Sure, it will kneecap your growth and your code will never see any real usage, but for some projects that might just be the best option.
This tweet is clearly not about 4,000,000,000 men, but the significantly smaller subset of those men calling women “females”. It might help to read a post before getting angry about it?
the people most impacted by Trump can’t vote or don’t have accommodations in place to be able to vote.
So we’re strategically sacrificing minorities. Got it.
Neutral eldritch
I disagree with your points fundamentally, and I believe the difference is in how we interpret both art and the creation of art. I do not believe that a prompter is able to convey enough intent for it to count.
This could be compared to someone commisioning a drawing for, for example, a story. The story and direction they give, that would be the prompt or what lead to it, in this case, would display their intent. The drawing itself, however, would not display their artistic vision, but that of the artist they commissioned to draw it. Now, they might coördinate with said artist to get their visions to align as closely as possible, but as I said, models have no vision, and so none can be aligned with. You could ‘find’ an image generated by such a model that aligns with what you wish for, but there is no intent behind it.
The environmental damage is inherent to the technology, as matrix multiplications are inherently not very efficient, and any given model runs a lot of them. Running a model at home seems more efficient because you only generate for yourself, but if every user of diffusion where to do this, the cost would not be better.
I do not understand what you see in the video you sent me. It does not, to me, seem to carry a message. Sure, some of it’s imagery can be aesthetically pleasing, but I cannot interpret it as carrying any meaning.
Oh, and dw, I did not mean to call you stupid, I think the ideas about art you have specifically are stupid. That does not necessarily carry over to any other part of you.
I judge art on the basis of three things:
The intent of the artist,
The context surrounding the art,
My own interpretation of the art
A stable diffusion model is not much more than a set of statistical functions executed over a large array of numbers. Therefore, the model cannot have intent.
The use of the model to generate images damages the environment, makes use of work made by artists who, by design, cannot be credited for said work, and no or very little artistic effort went into the generation. Therefore, the context is pretty loathesome.
The third point depends on the image, although I find that most images do not have much in the way of creativity or artistic direction, and come off as “bland”, “samey”, “wrong”. The fact that there is no intent makes it hard for me to read intent. Therefore, my interpretation is usually not very favourable.
These are my thoughts. I believe your ideas about art and how we should judge it (which is what you are prescribing) to be quite stupid, but you live your life however you want, I guess.
This is one of the first where I struggled to read it correctly. I think the colours are making the effect worse here.
However, mailbox can still be encrypted with pgp, and has some built in supports which make this easier.
One problem I had with proton/tuta is that you cannot use a third party app due to the encryption, which you can with mailbox. A problem I have with mailbox is that it does not support fido2 for login or 2fa, which could be a security concern.
Debian, devuan, arch, artix, nixos, guixSD, gentoo, funtoo, slackware, lfs
I don’t think it would be anymore. Modern compilers are really really good at what they do, and often manually optimizing(writing assembly yourself) makes programs slower. So unless you are very good at assembly, I would just trust the compiler.
If that were to happen that would indeed be a bad idea, I agree.
Your comment makes no sense, have a nice day!
AI art won’t do shit except boot people out of jobs that would require a real artist but won’t have too many people complaining if it is obvious goo.
As for open-source art tools, krita is fantastic and gets used by a lot of professionals.
windows is the most user friendly
This is entirely dependend on what you’re used to I think, because I used to think this too but now I can’t do anything with windows anymore.
I’m now using s6, which is great because nobody is using it so the best documentation is some random github page for running daemons with nix using various init programs.
Yeah, but at least here on lemmy a lot of that doesn’t seem to be very serious and everyone is mostly ok with whatever you use. Don’t know how it was on reddit.
no no, you’ve got it all wrong. The school day is almost over and no shooting has occurred yet, so they are here to correct that.