The uncanny valley is more a product of designing for “life-like” over things like “cute” or “endearing” or “emotionally expressive”.

Meaning, we can already cross the uncanny valley, and this AI filter will not help with any of it.

She is a nervous, FBI desk lady who’s never seen a day of action and stutters while giving case reports. Compared to Leon, she is an ordinary person. The filter makes her look like any star on The CW.

This reminds me a lot of the Smile EQ comparison that speaker sellers would make to impress average, 45-year-old men in Best Buy.

In the Grace picture alone, it removes the distant fog, it destroys the mood, it overrides the art style, it over-brightens the scene, it adds light sources that don’t exist, it removes the warm light spilling out of the shop window, it makes the color palette colder, it hyper-contrasts everything—there is no world in which I would call this an improvement.

It invents light sources for objects that don’t exist. This is generative.

My problems with AI, by the way, are faaar beyond IP theft.

Why am I ordering from a chef if I don’t like their cooking?

Why is it only when talking about llms that you start clutching your pearls about it?

I am of the opinion now, and this is entirely AI’s fault, that for the collective mental health of our society, a grocery store self-checkout should not even be allowed to “thank” you for your purchase.

Your absurdly strong pro technology fervor is actually blinding you from seeing this normally.

To get a model ship out of a bottle, you either need to reverse whatever method got it in there, deconstruct the ship, or break the glass.

To get concessions out of your masters, you have to able to think like this.

Life continues as it was, or you build another. That’s kind of a silly question.

And this is something you have to do instead of breaking them? The policy pen must be held in both hands while writing, I take it.

Haha!

You know, you get a pass. Not that you agree with me, I don’t know that yet, I just wasn’t expecting that heel turn.

to shit on the efforts of others.

The efforts of AI, you mean.

Truthfully, I wonder if we even need that guy’s 20 years any more. Maybe he should retire.

I am a strong believer in the power of shame. Republican racists must be taught that their options are either to bend to my will or shut up permanently. I don’t really care if they agree with me or not.

Now, that’s pretty provocative. I am not presently mounting rifles at LLM users. But, I do think it shows that I have more determination than you do.

Every library my team has ever included in a project has gone through rounds of evaluation to make sure it is 1. publically trusted, 2. well tested, 3. and still in active development. I have no idea what this has to do with mindlessly copying code.

so you invent your own code/algorithms for every project?

If you’re going to submit an algorithm that isn’t maintained and you don’t know how it works, I’m not merging your pull request.

it’s better not to publish open source code because somewhere down the road, you might make a decision that some crowd doesn’t like

I see we’re going with the “woke cancel culture ruined comedy” argument.

Mate, if you’re going to take your ball and leave over the slight possibility that you might have to answer to some criticism one day, you’re not really living in the civilized society that I do. It seems kind of pointless to even talk to you.

They will obviously stop saying they use AI, much like republicans pretend they’re not racist. So?

I call the both of them cowards who refuse to stand up for what they supposedly believe in.

How do you propose they should have taken them? Like, just lifted them in the night while the cops were busy jerking off?

We’re just gonna pretend the pre-LLM time period didn’t have people mindlessly copy paste code into all of our known projects?

No, IEatDaFeesh, that’s something that first-years do. Are you a first-year?

This specific developer is not the only audience to this behavior.

that it’s better not to stick your head out and publish open source code

I like the implication that open source code must include AI, and so the only recourse is to reject… all open source projects?

You know, we had a FOSS without AI like ten years ago. I’d prefer to keep that one.

No, I think they disagree. Or at least, I don’t mind treating them as such.

From sudoer:

Basically what they are saying is just praying > praying + smoking > just smoking.

This is the basis of the entire argument. What I see them doing is hyperfixating on an alleged flaw as a rhetorical tactic to defeat you.

I want to be clear: the point being made by the A and B versions of the smoker’s question is… obvious. It’s framing. Framing is a very well understood concept.

When I challenge people on grounds like these, I appear friendly, I make it explicitly known that I agree with the broader point, I offer alternatives that would make the point better, I refrain from damaging the rhetorical momentum (that is, we shouldn’t be bickering with each other because, to an audience, we should be a united front), and, I dunno, a fifth thing I’m sure I’ll come up with later.

If sudoer doesn’t disagree with you, they are still acting in opposition to you, which is 1) inconsiderate, and 2) demonstrates very poor social skills.