something_else

Im straight, but I can definitely deeply appreciate really good looking dudes when I see them. It’s pretty rare, though. And it’s not sexual. It’s more an appreciation of beauty. I find that you can see very attractive women pretty frequently if you go to the right places, but it’s a lot rarer to see guys who are exceptionally good looking, which might explain the pickiness.

I don’t think my open eye visuals are as strong as others, I get like mild open eye visuals. But my closed eye visuals are pretty intense and frankly it’s the closed eye visuals where all the mind-bending shit happens. Most of the time I go into like 4 or 5 really long trances when I trip where all the most interesting stuff happens. The open eye visuals are just icing on the cake

It does help to have friends, but it isn't a requirement. If you start going out at weekends a lot you will kill two birds with one stone. You'll make friends and you'll start talking to girls. Usually most big cities will have at least one (if not multiple) "going out" or "party" groups on meetup.com which are a great starting point.

My profile picture is something I generated years ago using Deep Dream and infinite zoom. I had to scale down the length and quality a lot for uploading it here, but here's the original video in higher quality. Make sure you set the quality to max before watching. It works by telling a network to overemphasise certain features. But you can select which layer of the network it uses at each stage. So I set it to progressively move to deeper and deeper (more abstract) levels as the video progresses. So it starts out with basic lines and shapes, then basic features like eyes, and by the end it is hallucinating animals. It's a good demonstration of the internals of a convolutions in a neural network (the fundamental model that most AI art models are based upon)

@Heart of Space You would also have to consider how environmental factors affect brain growth and size. Maybe the size of your brain is affected by the quality and quantity of nutrition you receive when you are a young child and your brain is still growing, and if certain races are less privileged on average, the quality and quantity of nutrition they received as a child would likely be worse/lower. So even if there were differences in brain size on average between races, you still don't know that's down to a race's genetics. It would be very hasty to come to any strong conclusions based on that study, let alone one with the implications of yours. And the fact you hadn't even read that study before strongly taking the position you have slightly concerns me as well, because it means your position is based pretty much entirely on bias. If that is the best you can come up with, you should at most conclude that "maybe the structural brain differences between races are worth investigating more"

Yea, men do this a lot and it's a big problem. I don't think that's what Leo was doing here though. He was replying to a comment which suggested that being a women was an easy life, by listing all of the ways in which women generally have it harder in life than men. He wasn't trying to put women down I don't think It was a bit harshly worded in some places I suppose but I don't think he meant it as a put down

Out of curiosity, what is the setup that these companies typically offer?

He can’t expand because he knows his arguments are based on nothing but bias. He’s resorting to deflection and distraction to avoid expanding on his main points with anything concrete You have given us nothing to consider. Your argument is essentially “I believe this, isn’t it just so obvious” You are the lazy one who is unwilling to substantiate your claims with anything, not everyone else for dismissing your arguments until you actually give something remotely concrete The burden of proof is squarely on you, no one has to take anything you say seriously until that requirement is fulfilled

One of the fundamental issues is that there are likely always going to be jobs that people don't want to do, that need to be done. E.g. sanitation, food production, and so on. Such a utopia couldn't exist without replacing these jobs almost completely with machinery and robotics.

If asking for proof of what you're saying is not substantiative, I don't know what is. You just don't have any proof, so you have to resort to deflective tactics. You also complained about ad hominem attacks against you above yet this is dangerously close to one.

Someone's going on an actualized.org MP3 binge then cos the site's been down most of the day lol

Don't live in Amsterdam unfortunately, but enjoy the readily available shrooms on every corner

Honestly, don't learn it if you don't have to. A lot of the hardcore pickup terminology is designed for guys who are really lacking socially, and it's a little bit culty. Learning most of the terminology will hinder you if you are already reasonably successful in dating. At that point it's more about learning how to meet more girls, or girls that are more compatible with you.

@Heart of Space At the end of the day the burden of proof is on you, and you haven't really provided anything substantial.

@Danioover9000 In this case the technical understanding is important to a degree. His critique was largely based around the idea that the AI is just copying shapes from source images which is pretty much just wrong and very much an oversimplification.

I'm assuming this is directed at me. I read it, but you grossly oversimplified how AI art models work and that was what I felt like I wanted to respond to the most. Your main point was that AI art can't generate anything new, it can only compose existing styles. But like 99%+ of human art ever created is just composing various existing ideas/styles/objects as well. And most of that doesn't require the artist to cite every experience they had in their life that lead them to produce a certain piece of art. That was my initial point. 'Adding your own twist' to a piece of art is really just you combining multiple experiences you have had in your life into a piece of artwork which is exactly what an AI art model is doing too. Your mind is just exponentially better at this right now so it feels like something different to you.

Yes but you can only do so much with cosmetics like makeup and they are temporary. Even if you manage to make yourself more attractive for one night, if the guy sticks around you're going to have to reveal your natural self at some point. So it's a very superficial form of increasing intrinsic value.

Unattractive women have little intrinsic value, and it's very hard for them to change that. At least as a guy you have some element of control over your value.

This just sounds like bro science This could easily just be your own bias against women who have had more partners making your sex with those women worse. In fact, that seems far more likely to me.

If humans are contributing that much extra divine and spiritual truths through their art, then you have no reason to be scared of AI art. The spiritual and divine truths could be expressed through AI assisted art just as much as they could through hand drawn. Most of those artists are not doing it for the money anyway, they're doing it because they enjoy it. And they'll do it whether AI art exists or not. Maybe they'll even use AI to assist them.

I also know software engineers with 10yrs experience who are terrible software engineers. But I'd still go with them over someone with 0yrs experience.

Ehm, sort of. This is a huge simplification. The AI isn't just copying shapes from source material. Neural networks are hierarchal and learn relationships all the way from individual pixels, to lines, to colours, to basic shapes, to complex shapes, and to entire objects and styles. Each layer of the model works at different levels of abstraction, quite similar to how your neurology works. My profile picture is some AI art actually, and it's a good example. I generated it years and years ago using a deep dream model. On each zoom, it passes the image through deeper and deeper (more and more abstract) layers in the network to generate more abstract imagery. I had to crop and jump frames to fit it under the limit for the site so you miss a lot of the detail. But here's the full thing. You can see how it has learnt representations of things at different levels of abstraction and is not just copying directly from source. And diffusion models are learning to convert random noise + text prompts into structured images, which means the process is so chaotic and unpredictable that you will get unique results that are composed of lots of distinct patterns of art that the model has learnt. Essentially the model is learning abstract representations/patterns of art which it can mix and match, it's not just learning how to copy shapes. It's exactly what your brain does. Your brain is an abstraction machine, just like a neural network. Your brain is just far more powerful at abstraction and can source experience from more places at the moment. It understands composition, anatomy and object relations, just not as well as a human does. Really, the fundamental difference is that a human can integrate emotion and a wider range of experience into the art, which obviously the machine cannot do yet. But the fundamental issue I was talking about was that of citing, credit and copyright. You as a human have looked at tons of art throughout your life and had tons of unique experiences that influence your art, yet you are not required to cite every single piece of that when you produce a new piece of art. Why should it be different when an AI does it?

Exactly. If you feel like you can compete with her previous partners you have nothing to worry about. It’s pretty much pure insecurity

Are you stealing copyrighted art if you let it inspire future art that you as a human create? Should you compensate every artist who’s art you ever looked at because it has influenced your brain and impacted future art that you create? Because that’s kind of what’s happening with AI art models Something to think about

This is what I’m worried about. I think I’ll need to judge while I’m out there