lolcatnip

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

As a 45 year old, damn do I not miss them at all.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

How much damage will they do in the mean time, though?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Like some sort of minimum amount they have to offer in terms of wages?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 9 months ago

Let's see your summary of the article, then. I can't help but notice you haven't included one in your comment.

(Apologies if you were being tongue in cheek.)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

That requires vastly more work to produce any results at all, to the point that most animation people might want to produce never gets made because the process is far too expensive. Mediocre animation that gets made using AI tools is better then high-quality animation that never gets made at all.

Blender and AI tools both have their place but they're not interchangeable. And just wait until Blender starts incorporating AI, which it will, because the purpose of something like Blender is to use computers to automate most of the work that would need to be done with previous generations of tools, and AI is just an extension of that. Animation will exist on a continuum from fully handmade artwork to fully machine generated artwork. Unless you think everything should be drawn by hand one frame at a time, you should be happy about everyone being able to produce animation in a way that suits their skill level and the amount of time they have available.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

People can and have made the same argument about new technology since the dawn of the industrial revolution, but it hasn't worked out that way. Industrialized countries are synonymous with rich countries. The problem with new technology, both now and then, it's that the ownership of the means of production always becomes concentrated in the hands of a small class of people who have no interest in sharing their wealth. This far the benefits of technology have trickled down to the masses, but never without hurting a bunch of people in the process precisely because a few people have been allowed to hoard most of the benefits for themselves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Utopian science fiction is less popular, but look at Star Trek for example. Commander Data in The Next Generation and the EMH in Voyager provide invaluable help to the crews they work with. Or look at the robot in Interstellar for another example for a possibly portrayal of AI in a mostly dystopian setting. Even the droids in Star Wars would be impossible without very advanced AI (even if that fact isn't discussed in universe), and a great many droids are shown as being critical to the success of ventures they take part in.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Going to work so I can eat and pay rent fucking sucks, what are you talking about? The fact that you even conceptualize economic output as being all about money means you're missing the point of an economy. Money is a representation of wealth, not wealth itself. You can't eat money, shelter yourself from the elements with money, cure diseases with money, etc. Having access to goods and services is a blast, but money is nothing more than a mechanism to facilitate trade and the distribution of wealth.

The "commie bullshit" is entirely your contribution. I said nothing at all about making everyone's income equal. Not within a country and certainly not between regions with wildly different costs of living. I'm talking about actual wealth, actual labor, and the way a society decides who deserves to have access to material wealth.

Let me spell it out for you: when a new technology makes a category of work obsolete, it sounds be a good thing because less work needs to be done to produce the same wealth. It's like how having a washing machine is great because it saves you from doing many hours of tedious labor with essentially no downside. The reason that doesn't work at a societal level is because our economic system is designed to funnel 100% of the benefits of labor-saving technology to a parasitic ownership class, leaving the average person poorer as a result. Our economic system is based entirely around scarcity, and introducing just a little bit of abundance breaks it and fucks over people whose labor is no longer needed by denying them access to wealth.

Do you really think it's reasonable that having less work needing to be done to produce the same wealth should ever make the average person less well off?

[–] [email protected] 46 points 9 months ago (24 children)

I dream of a world where nobody has a job they have to do for money.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

RA 17h 45m 40.0409s, dec −29° 0′ 28.118″

Here's a map: https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1835b/

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I think passcodes currently get consolidated with an entity like Google, but I've read Bitwarden is adding support for them. It definitely won't be an issue long term.

view more: ‹ prev next ›