Yes.

I too, for a long fucking time, held the belief that they must be just feeding us that shit. No- I'll grant them this: They eat their own shit.

Relocating your headquarters does not unincorporate your incorporated entities within the jurisdiction in question, and that's the trouble they're in now. They have many onshore (Chinese) holdings.

An Irish corporation doing business in the US via a US-incorporated entity is subject to US law. The people within that parent corporation are very subject to US law if they step foot on US soil, and mostly subject to US law if they step foot on the soil of any country with an extradition treaty with the US.

I'm not- you're doing that for me.

Ya, you are.

What in the fuck are you talking about?
From the page:

Emphasis mine.

A Markov system's evolution depends only on the current state.
i.e.,
If the last token was A, the next token's probability stems only from that fact.
If that is not a true statement, then your system is not Markovian.

To demonstrate the difference, a Markovian token predictor would have a next state probability field of V^n, where V is the vocabulary, and n is how large your n-gram is.
A non-Markovian LLM has a next state probability field of V^c*V, where c is the configuration space of the context, so that a small model easily has multiple googols of probability space for its next token. They're literally not comparable.

One of those is simple and predictable. The other has a state space that's astronomical.
You can, if you really want to abuse the definition, say that an LLM is Markovian, in the same way that the universe is.
Again, feel free to educate yourself.
That is why it is stupid to compare an autocomplete with an LLM.

What you did wasn't mockery- it was outright fucking buffoonery.
The argument you're implying is that models have self-execution abilities, and are in fact not calculated by programs.

That is entirely incorrect, and I explained that to your stalker ass last time.
A Markov system must satisfy the Markov Property.
Feel free to educate yourself.
Maths and computer science aren't in disagreement at all, only reality and your ignorance.

LLMs are autoregressive- they consider the entire past history to predict the next token, not just the last token. They are not Markovian.
I'd love to have educated you in a less condescending manner, but honestly motherfucker- you earned the demeanor you got.

How, precisely, do you imagine a bunch of vectors are applied to a series of text to create an image? Do you imagine that a little hermunculous within the machine rubs the vectors all over the text until an image grows forth from them like fungus?

Diffusion generated art is a process. The model is merely the weights used for that process.
It takes software to feed the noise and embeddings to the model in order to produce the image.

I swear to fuck you get dumber every time you try.

Bullshit. You're trying the mental gymnastics. I tried to gently tell you it was just going to make you look stupid.
You said:

Which of course, no one ever denied. This is called a straw man.

And this is you beating that straw man to a pulp.

All I need to do is point to one artist who judged his work by what the output of the model was, no differently than a complex filter in photoshop, which they also have no fucking clue what its technical details are, but a pretty fine grasp of what its non-technical details are- almost precisely analogous to how they'll use model-generated/augmented art.

You see, you aren't really trying to argue for their control. Because they have that. What you're trying to do is wrap up an anti-AI argument in a veneer of apologetics. It's transparent, and it smells of horse shit. Give it a rest.

Shit- you're right! Games haven't been made in 3.5 years! It's like Children of Men up in this bitch.
Diffusion-generated art is all over gaming.

Or perhaps you were arguing that, "since games were made before its advent, they can be made without it!" To which... well, no shit. What is your point?

And you seem to have an elementary grasp of logic.

That an artist may want that proves my point, not yours.
Artists are not a homogeneous group. Some may want to bend the laws of physics. Others will be steadfastly against it.br. There is no amount of mental gymnastics you can execute to make your statement less ridiculous.

You don't think stable diffusion is used in games? That's silly- it's all over in them.

Precisely. Either it will- or it won't.
It'll be a hit, or it will bomb. But either way, what it will not be, is contrary to the intent of those that put it in their game.

Wrong answer, narccyboy.
That's you trying to engage in apologetics for Searle's dumbfuck intuition pump.

If you're trying to imply that I think the Abrahamic biblical stories are an original work from the mind of god, then you're a fucking idiot.
If you think that the Abrahamic biblical stories are an original work from the mind of god, then you're a fucking idiot.

Ultimately- I suppose that means you're a fucking idiot.

my belief in LLMs? What- that they exist? What kind of stupid fucking statement is this?

I did not compare "an LLM" with "an animal".
I compared a diagnostic criteria of an LLM with a diagnostic criteria of an animal.

If I say that a box is striped like a Zebra, am I bordering on the edge of psychotic?
Any inference you made on my regarding an LLM as "alive" was a projection on your part.

Blaming the calculator.... that's how desperate you guys are, now?
I think you should blame TSMC, next. If that isn't enough to sate your rage, you can go after Gaia for giving us sand.

It's true- artists are just all about control. And fleepeds are all about speaking for other people.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps artists aren't a homogeneous group? It should be obvious since the word itself is so fucking vague that no 2 people at random will agree on who it includes.