• 7 Posts
  • 387 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2023

help-circle

  • Yeah it was odd to read that description being presented as an oddity - that sounds like most households I know. If you have a wife, kids, or roommate and don’t enjoy being holed up in your own room the whole time you play (and those sharing your house don’t just want to watch you game all night) then in house streaming is a huge boon.

    I PC game, but most of my gaming is done on the couch, streamed onto my phone. I’ve been very tempted to buy a dedicated streaming device lately to avoid draining my phone battery while playing










  • Dissappear? No, of course not

    Fall out of repair, and be unable to be repaired effectively without tools, resources, or knowledge that are no longer accessible?

    Abso-fucking-lutely

    Take a deep sea oil rig. How long do you think it’ll be operational without maintenance with all that sea water? After not too long you won’t be able to repair the damage without serious industrial capabilities, and that’s assuming you even know how to fix it.

    Really even as relatively little as a few decades of total chaos and disorganization would be enough to make crawling back really hard. A century and more and it really could be impossible, or at least improbable - especially given that the humanity that comes out of the other end of the crisis is the same one that got us into it. So the remaining pieces of major valuable infrastructure left will probably get wrecked as the survivors fight over them




  • True, but Its 100% possible for us to get knocked back into the iron age, and if that happens, there’s a very real chance we won’t be able to climb up again.

    Easy to access sources of a lot of the resources needed to rebuild a modern civilization are gone, the only reason we can get to the remaining deposits is because we already have the advanced equipment to extract it. It’s entirely possible that if we get knocked back down the tech ladder, we may never climb back up again


  • The way it sounds right now is “AI generated faces don’t have all these artifacts 99% of the time” (I’m paraphrasing A LOT, but you get what I mean.)

    The only way it sounds like that is if you don’t read the article at all and draw all your conclusions from just reading the title.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure many do just that, but that’s not the fault of the study. They clearly state their method for selecting (or “cherry picking”) images


  • I don’t know why people (not saying you, more directed at the top commenter) keep acting like cherry picking AI images in these studies invalidate the results - cherry picking is how you use AI image generation tools, that’s why most will (or can) generate several at once so you can pick the best one. If a malicious actor was trying to fool people, of course they’d use the most “real” looking ones, instead of just the first to generate

    Frankly the studies would be useless if they didn’t cherry pick, because it wouldn’t line up with real world usage