You’re always gonna have problems lifting a body in one piece. Apparently the best thing to do is cut up a corpse into six pieces and pile it all together. And when you got your six pieces, you gotta get rid of them, because it’s no good leaving it in the deep freeze for your mum to discover, now is it?

Then I hear the best thing to do is feed them to pigs. You got to starve the pigs for a few days, then the sight of a chopped-up body will look like curry to a pisshead. You gotta shave the heads of your victims, and pull the teeth out for the sake of the piggies’ digestion. You could do this afterwards, of course, but you don’t want to go sievin’ through pig shit, now do you?

They will go through bone like butter. You need at least sixteen pigs to finish the job in one sitting, so be wary of any man who keeps a pig farm. They will go through a body that weighs 200 pounds in about eight minutes. That means that a single pig can consume two pounds of uncooked flesh every minute. Hence the expression, “as greedy as a pig”.

I like the part where Dr Grant just looks dead straight into the camera and in a serious tone says ‘There are dinosaurs here. There are dinosaurs in this Jurassic Park’.

Spunch Bob Sqor Ponts

Yes and no. He’s had more serious roles like Life, Safe House, Buried, Smokin’ Aces etc. He certainly has a ‘type’ but at the moment it feels like you could just lift-and-shift his character from one film to another and noone would notice.

I’d like Ryan to return to more serious roles. He’s a decent actor but he just ends up playing the same character in everything at the moment; he’s getting predictable and typecast imo.

You into masks, baby? Kinky! I like that, baby, yeah! Behave!

I find it crazy that Black Ops, a series that’d surely sell gangbusters with minimal marketing thanks to word of mouth, gets a marketing budget bigger than the GDP of a small country. Yet a new IP that noone has heard of yet gets a far smaller budget. It seems completely back to front, to me.

Well, can they?

The argument being made is: "AI is currently slop but there is a reasonable expectation that it will be pushed until it is indistinguishable from human work, and therefore devaluing of human work.

Again, if the work is ‘indistinguishable’ then I don’t see how AI art ‘devalues’ human work any more than the work done by another human. This just sounds like old fashioned competition, which has existed as long as art itself has.

I don’t like AI because it’s just another way that “corporate gonna corporate” and it never ends up working out for the mere mortals’ benefit

Corporations abusing technology to the disbenefit of people is nothing new, unfortunately, and isn’t unique to AI (see Email, computers, clocking in machines, monitoring software etc). That speaks to a need for better corporate oversight and better worker rights.

misinformation is already so prevalent and it’s going to continue to get worse (we have seen this already–trump abuses it continually).

This is a good point, but again AI is hardly the first time technology has been used to spread lies and misinformation. This highlights a fundamental problem with our media and a need to teach better critical thinking in schools etc.

They’re all valid concerns but in my opinion they suggest AI is being used as an enabler, and not that the problems in question are the sole product of it. Sadly if we stopped using anything and everything that was misused for nefarious means we’d go back to the stone age.

AI is generally bad because it tends to steal content from human creators…

Again, this is an argument that I see a lot, that’s simply not true. AI is not stealing anything. Theft is a specific legal term. If I steal your TV, I have your TV and you don’t. If AI is trained on some content that content still exists. Whatever training takes place steals nothing.

…because corporations want another excuse to throw more workers on the street in favor of machines…

Your point is a valid one, but this not unique to AI and is the inevitable result of the onward march of technology. The very thing we’re using to communicate right now, the Internet, is responsible for billions of job losses. That’s not a valid reason to get rid of it. Instead of blaming AI for putting people out work, we should be pressuring governments to implement things like UBI to provide people with a basic living wage. That way people need not fear the impact the advance of technology will have on their ability to feed and house themselves.

There are some AI uses that are good though, such as AI voice generation to help those that can’t speak to communicate with the world and not sound like a robot.

These are great examples.

Sure, but there’s never a qualifier in these arguments. It’s just ‘hur dur AI bad’ which is lazy and disingenuous.

Given how harder it’s becoming to tell apart AI slop from something made by a human…

If AI is that good, it’s not ‘slop’, is it? I see this argument all the time. Apparently AI is both awful slop, devoid of merit and also indistinguishable from human made content and a threat to us all. Pick a side.

The developer of Thorium (a Chromium based browser) has stated they intent to maintain older functionality for as long they’re able.

Most likely you’re correct, but I was basing my assumption from the following:

However, the Port Authority of NSW said no oil spills had been reported by vessels.

Time may tell I guess…

Natural undersea oil leak somewhere?

All of which should be done by human beings. Period.

Currently, maybe. But technology is fantastic at accuracy, better than humans in many regards. Gemini might have a way to go before it gets there, but it or its successors will get there and it’s moving fast.

Productivity is irrelevant here

I’m not sure it is. Productivity also refers to efficiency of services. If AI can make the services of the National Archives more productive for its staff and/or the public then surely that’s a good thing?

🎵 Tesla Optimus! Humans in disguise! 🎵

How can we protect something we don’t understand and don’t value?

I’m not sure I agree with the concept that if you don’t understand something you don’t value it. Someone can value a walk in the park without understanding the names of the various plants etc. Don’t conflate accidental ignorance with willful ignorance.

Maybe they should turn that mirror on themselves. Take a long look at the ‘non decent humans’ within their own ranks:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/4/23901575/ubisoft-executives-arrest-sexual-harassment-investigation

Second recommendation for Affinity Photo as a Photoshop replacement. 👍