I had an intro to sociology prof spend an entire lecture on full blown anti vax conspiracy shit.

Also had a bio prof take 5 during an anatomy lecture to give a teary eyed plea for the young women in class to not ruin one of the ‘fundamental joys of motherhood’ by getting their nipples pierced.

Wage workers fill out a form with their employer called a W-4 that lets the employer determine the appropriate amount to deduct in tax and pay to the IRS for you.

Many people have additional sources of income though, some of which will pay tax for you, some of which do not. Each Year when you ‘file’ your taxes you gather all that information together and pay any outstanding balance. (or receive a refund for overpayment). The form is called a 1040 and comes with a workbook that walks you through everything. It includes very large tables where you can look up the tax amount to avoid having to calculate it as well. If your tax situation is fairly straightward an eighth grader could probably do it.

I see them fine, firefox on android and arch.

Not enough foil, maybe add a couple old cds.

I give it 3 more years, tops, until Windows is fully a subscription service. Hope you enjoyed the era of owning your PC because it’s coming to an end.

Don’t be ridiculous, they love their customers. You just ain’t one of them. Their target demo continues to be people don’t want to think about it and have enough money to not care about the difference between $8 and $80. Same as ever. It’s also kinda hard to fault them considering how much fucking money they make.

Im thinking that the finals is not utilizing my nvidia graphics card so if anyone has advice i would greatly appreciate

Well, if you have a suspicion, start with confirming it. Simplest test, does the card get hot? Is the fan spinning up? If you install a gpu monitor does it show a spike? Does your CPU even have integrated graphics?

Because you had a bullshit job to begin with?

Apple and I have very different notions of what it means to own something.

Not only have many states removed the right to an abortion, some of them are starting to restrict access to abortion care even when failure to provide that care could lead to grave injury such as the loss of organs or fertiity.

While there is a federal law on the books that seems to require this care, a case challenging one such state law was ruled on by SCOTUS over procedural issues and it is not clear yet how the high court will decide on the substance of the issue.

This one. I was born in 85, but in very poor, very rural Pennsylvania. I describe my upbringing as nearly gen x, with some millenial quirks.

Women and girls should show us the goods so we don’t get so horny.

Yeah, nobody said anything even close to this. Cute trolling.

Oh FFS, I clipped the word new. Of course it uses information in the prompt. That’s trivial. No one cares about it returning the information that was given to it in the prompt. Nevertheless, mea culpa. You got me.

this is a ship of thesseus premise here

No, it really isn’t.

The pupose of that paradox is that you unambiguously are recreating/replacing the ship exactly as you already know it is. The reason the ‘ai’ in question here is even being used is that it isn’t doing that. It’s giving you back much more than it was given.

The comparison would be if Thesues’ ship had been lost and you definitely don’t have the ship anymore, but had managed to recover the sail. If you take the sail to an experienced builder (the ai) who had never seen the ship, then he might be able to build a reasonable approximation based on inferences from the sail and his wealth of knowledge, but nobody is going to be daft enough to assert it is same ship. Does the wheel even have the same number of spokes? Does it have the same number of oars? The same weight of anchor?

The only way you could even tell if his attempted fascimile was close is if you had already intimate knowledge of the ship from some other source.

…when a heavily altered photo of something that vaugely resembles it’s original photo in most aspects, is considered to be a photo”

Disagree.

There is no contradicton in believing that collectively shaming people who have had porn of them made is wrong and that making nonconsensual porn of people is wrong. Both are wrong. At no point did I say otherwise.

The difference is that a manipulated photo starts with a photo. It actually contains recorded information about the subject. Deepfakes do not contain any recorded information about the subject unless that subject is also in the training set.

Yes it is semantics, it’s the reason why we have different words for photography and drawing and they are not interchangeable.

I don’t know how common it is to argue that women and girls should be treated as though they have worth and dignity regardless of their sexual proclivities and discretion, but it should be more common than it seems to be.

As for your assertion that holding this belief somehow betrays pedophilic sympathies - I have to admit, I don’t follow. Although I will say whether the literacy failure in this argument is mine or yours I am content to leave as an exercise to our readers.

Perhaps at least a small portion of the blame for what these girls are going through should be laid upon the society which obstinately teaches that a woman’s worth as a person is so inextricably tied to her willingness and ability to maintain the privacy of her areolas and vulva that the mere appearance of having failed in the endeavour is treated as a valid reason to disregard her humanity.

photos

They aren’t photos. They’re photorealistic drawings done by computer algorithms. This might seem like a tiny quibble to many, but as far as I can tell it is the crux of the entire issue.

There isn’t any actual private information about the girls being disclosed. The algorithms, for example, do not and could not know about and produce an unseen birthmark, mole, tattoo, piercing, etc. A photograph would have that information. What is being shown is an approxomation of what similar looking girls in the training set look like, with the girls’ faces stiched on top. That is categorically different than something like revenge porn which is purely private information specific to the individual.

I’m sure it doesn’t feel all that different to the girls in the pics, or to the boys looking at it for that matter. There is some degree of harm here without question. But we must tread lightly because there is real danger in categorizing algorithmic guesswork as reliable which many authoritarian types are desperate to do.

https://www.wired.com/story/parabon-nanolabs-dna-face-models-police-facial-recognition/

This is the other side of the same coin. We cannot start treating the output of neural networks as facts. These are error prone black-boxes and that fact must be driven hard into the consciousness of every living person.

For some, I’m sure purely unrelated reason, I feel like reading Phillip K Dick again…