Yes, I really do wish social networks would start using it to create alt text, and stop asking me to do it. Ideally they would recognize scaled or slightly cropped images and reuse the text from the last time so they don't have to reprocess reposts.

But as you just said, the AI can turn an image into text — which you can use as a prompt. The AI can't generate the exact same image twice, but the artist probably can't replicate their works with exactitude without having them in front of them as a reference. With that as a standard, the AI can simply copy the source image, and do a better job than the artist at that task. Reproducibility is not the soul of art.

Yes, of course it is. Creating models and then animating them can be considered as just the way you give the rendering engine instructions on what to draw for you.

You're certainly telling us a lot about yourself, here.

What? Yes, of course they did. Tons of people have asked for generative AI of many kinds.

Yes, but the AI lets you generate thousands of results in the time that it takes to make one image with less automation, so this is not an indictment against the technology.

KBB says some are up to 55 miles on a charge, so you're close if you're talking about the best case. But some do as little as 14 or 15 miles, and AFAICT the average is around 20-25 somewhere.

In the USA, the average commute takes 30 minutes, so let's call it around 20-25 miles. You could get to work, but you couldn't get back unless you had someplace to plug in there.

Maybe, but it was still an incredibly dumb thing to say.

However, only series hybrids get to do that trick, like the i3 with range extender. Most hybrids work in parallel, and the electric motor is small and can't do primary acceleration alone, so the motor doesn't run at optimal RPM and you don't actually get that advantage.

The i3 with range extender is different from most hybrids because it's a series plug-in hybrid. That means that the electric motor is sufficient to move the vehicle at all speeds and levels of acceleration. This isn't true of parallel hybrids, so your i3 is not generally representative.

You think they don't use internal combustion engine generators?

More of the power put in goes into the food, so watt for watt, they are better at heating everything.

I don't disagree, I'm just not in so much hurry that I can't wait another minute.

I had a mediocre drip maker from Proctor Silex, it made okay coffee but the carafe could only be poured at a very narrow range of speeds or it would piss all over the table.

It died, but it lasted OK before that, so I bought another one. They managed to make it even shittier. They "fixed" the pouring problem so it would pour okay at low to medium speeds, which actually was an improvement. But the new unit could only be filled with water through a hatch, and you could only fill it very slowly. And then the water came out too quickly, so it made shitty weak coffee.

I returned it and got a $100 espresso machine, which I get a better result from than going out to a chain.

Most cheap espresso makers aren't really espresso makers. They don't make enough pressure for full extraction. However, there is now a ~$100 DeLonghi pumped unit which does a fine job. Sadly it has a stupid milk steamer, but it's otherwise pretty good.

We can have 220/240V outlets in the USA. We have standards for them at a variety of current carrying capacities. I've installed the 240V@20A outlets (on new circuits from a subpanel) before. Then we could slap a US style plug on one of your kettles and run it just fine.

However, my inverter microwave does a fine job of heating water, to boiling if I want. Also, an espresso machine is available for $100 (from DeLonghi) and produces a better result.

The decision as to whether something is copyrightable doesn't depend on whether it's art, or whether the person who wrote the prompt can be called an artist. The copyright office has no involvement in that argument at all. It's based on whether there is sufficient human input for it to be considered a work by a human, because the purpose of copyright law is ostensibly/allegedly to protect the creators of works. What they're saying is that he cannot be considered to be a creator, not whether he is an artist. It's not only artistic works which are eligible for copyright protection, so that argument doesn't matter and he's wasting his time by having it unless it makes his art sufficiently notable to make it worth something.

One definition of art is anything which is designed with aesthetics in mind, by which definition LLM graphics output can obviously qualify. And the common definition of artist is someone who creates art, so by a reasonable definition he is an artist. But that still doesn't make any difference in whether he can get a copyright on LLM output.

Yes, two important things have happened since it was good. One, it was sold to DICE which was indifferent, and sold again to B!zX which is malicious. They put "Nazi" in the word filter to protect Nazis from being insulted; they eventually took it out but "Re!ch" is still in there, so they can protect the institution of Nazism even if they don't protect individual Nazis. Two, Donald Trump became president. Perhaps you missed one or both of these occurrences.

Thanks. The 2A guys have been a lot quieter since Trump went full fascist and they failed to respond, so maybe we have a shot at solving at least one of those things. Trump also said he wants to take away the guns first and look at going to court later, but the ammosexuals seem to have blocked that out, so unfortunately we won't have their help removing the trump tumor from our body politic.

You obviously do not, and now you have doubled down on not understanding it. Why are you determined to prove that you're a schmuck? You do that with every post, no additional posts are necessary.

Well, that tracks. You're citing Godwin's law incorrectly, so indeed, you clearly do not care what Mike Godwin thinks. The only remaining question is, why are you attempting to cite Godwin's law (and failing) when you don't care what Mike Godwin thinks?

1) Godwin's law is that as the length of a USENET thread grows, the probability of someone being compared to Hitler approaches 1. You do not understand Godwin's law any more than most people understand Murphy's Law. (Both are fine examples of Murphy's law.)
2) Mike Godwin explicitly said that comparing Trump to Hitler is apt, not that this is relevant to Godwin's law, which doesn't refer to aptness of comparison.

It seems like you are ignorant on every topic.

It's probably wrong, as we will likely have a nuclear war before then, and we can have a party at ground zero instead.