The Telegraph did a response to this, make of it what you will: https://web.archive.org/web/20250102100357/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/02/no-brexit-not-costing-uk-economy-100bn-year/

I’d call him a cunt but he lacks the warmth and the depth.

👁️ 🔻 👁️

Sequel to Alyx?

Nearly £3,000 for a graphics card. Jesus fucking Christ.

plagiarize: : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s production) without crediting the source.

Since almost no one actually consented to having their images used as training data for generative art, and since it never credits the training data that was referenced to train the nodes used for any given generation; it is using another persons production without crediting the source, and thus is text book plagiarism.

AI systems like generative art models are trained on large datasets to recognize patterns, styles, and structures, but the output they create does not directly copy or reproduce the original data. Instead, the AI generates new works by synthesizing learned features. This is more akin to how a human artist might create something inspired by various influences. If the generated image does not directly replicate any specific piece of the training data, it cannot be considered “using another’s production without crediting the source.”

Also AI platforms like Midjourney do not “reference” specific works in a way that can be credited. The training process distills millions of examples into mathematical representations, not a library of individual artworks. Crediting every source is not only infeasible and impractical, it is also not analogous to failing to attribute a specific inspiration or idea, which is a cornerstone of plagiarism.

AI generated art doesn’t meet the definition of plagiarism though?

The cover by Disturbed is good to: https://youtu.be/u9Dg-g7t2l4

I thought the set he did on Luigi Mangione was really good.

I think the issue I’ve been grappling with is, where do we draw the line as to what is an ‘acceptable’ murder? Like what if another Healthcare CEO is killed, but they’re violently knifed to death? Are we still celebrating then? What if they’re shot, but raped first? Are we still printing t-shirts? What if they’re shot, but so is their family? What if innocent passers by also get caught in the cross fire? Do we still cheer for them? What level of mental gymnastics do we have to do to justify something as ‘justice’ vs just plain old ‘murder?’ Where does this take us? Where does that reasoning end?

Because it’s about sending a message. They’ve seen how popular this guy and his actions have become and are trying to throw everything at him so it puts off any copycats.

It’s been, what, 6 months? Out of a four year run? At least give them some time before deciding they’ve failed.

On Lemmy:

• !goodnews@kbin.social

• !lemmybewholesome@lemmy.world

• !goodnewseveryone@sh.itjust.works

• !upliftingnews@lemmy.world

• https://lemmy.world/c/hopeposting

• https://lemmy.world/c/worldinprogress

• https://lemmy.world/c/climatehope

Elsewhere:

• https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/

• https://www.goodgoodgood.co/

• https://www.futurecrunch.com/

• https://www.positive.news/

We had to literally take our stairs apart to get our bed upstairs. Convenient!

I thought they were fine. The Pac Man, New World and Armoured Core ones stood out for me. Some of them felt superfluous (looking at you Crossfire) and it was disappointing they didn’t explore a greater variety of art styles. However for what it was I thought they were an entertaining enough watch.

I did the update and now the X to close in the top right doesn’t work anymore, for some reason.

Because it’s a opportunity to trot out the low hanging fruit of ‘Videos games promote violence’, providing a convenient target to point the finger at.

Yes, because in a country where wildlife is declining rapidly, a country that has one of the lowest biodiversity levels in the world, the solution is to allow developers to just build over the remaining habitats whilst making vauge hand-waving promises about protection.

I get the need to build more, but unless the government is going to take biodiversity loss seriously, you’re just destroying more of what we have the most little of.