pjhenry1216

If it's specifically what you want, it's not AI otherwise you'd be over fitting.

I'm not talking about any specific tools. I'm talking about the actual theory. I'm glad you can contradict yourself by claiming very little can get you immense details (except it's also exactly what you want?)

I'm sorry I offended you and that you're getting ridiculously angry and defensive when I said creating something via AI isn't art.

The multiple posts of people not being able to do that should have made it clear that doesn't always work.

Every word has an impact that you can't predict. So no. All your words and condescending tone speak more about what you don't know. You are are hitting a button and continually trying new things until you get the results from the AI that you want. That is not the same. Especially since you'll start just changing things just because your original intent didn't match what you want so you'll start reaching for other synonyms and the like.

It simply isn't the same as human inspiration. There's a reason courts voted against giving rights to AI generated art to the prompt creator. Their reasoning holds.

Just because someone might not be able to tell the difference between a forgery and the real thing doesn't make them both equally art.

Same holds true to your example which I literally already used and explained why it didn't work. Are you even reading my comments or just ranting?

I'm not arbitrary. I explicitly gave a reasonable difference between content and art. You can create content without soul, that's fine. I'm not saying you need to mix your own paint. I'm saying art is inherently human by definition. You can pump out all the content you want, but it will just make finding decent art that much worse. It's like saying ChatGPT can pump out android apps more quickly, but I don't think anyone would argue it'd raise the quality of the Android app markets.

You're just thinking of everything from the point of view of middle management. Quantity over quality.

When you remove humans from the equation, it's not art. It's content. It's disposable fluff. It's mass produced. It's soulless. But sure, think yourself intelligent because you literally put money over anything else. Why don't you just flood the market with remakes and remasters at this point. It fits your argument.

You can't raise an expectation of art by literally removing any meaning to it.

I think you're missing the point. You're still generating something purely based only on other things. There's nothing of an artist in there. There's no message. There's no art. You created content. You aren't in there. And I know this seems odd because there's no way to know this without extra knowledge, but something is lost. And it's not an artist's tool. It's a non-artist's tool.

The answer is a resounding maybe. If you activated with a Microsoft account or if there's a TPM chip, the chances of it still working increases. There are different kinds of licenses, but if it fails, there's a better than not chance calling MS support and just telling them you had a hardware failure on your laptop and you need to reinstall, they'll get you going. Not a guarantee though. And I'll caveat and say this information is a couple years old (I don't work in tech support anymore).

Usually calling Windows support, they'll give you a key if you just tell them you replaced some piece of hardware due to failure, assuming you haven't been transferring the same key around for awhile. They tend to be more invested in keeping you in the Windows ecosystem than they are are just getting one more license sold.

Keys are usually stored in the TPM chip and/or tied to Microsoft accounts if you use one. If you don't have an account, there's actually a limit to how often a key can activate new hardware. If there's no TPM, there's simply a limit within a certain timeframe that it can be used to activate on the same hardware.

It's not the same as an artist being inspired. It's more like an artist painting something in the style of someone else. AI can generate anything new and it doesn't transform things in its own way. It just copies and melds together. Nothing about it is really it's own. It's just a biased algorithm putting things together. Moreover, the artist could actually forget what the painting looks like, but still be inspired. If you erase something from the LLM, it will change it's output. It's basically more of a constant copying.

That analogy is what a bunch of people who want to sell AI art try to pitch. It's the difference between content and art.

I've seen AGI thrown around. Artificial General Intelligence.

I feel like they have poor track records in choosing books. They seem to only ever choose Young Adult Fiction... which isn't bad, but if the ones they tend to choose, they're usually very tropey.

And we have A24 studios. They seem to be doing a pretty good job lately.

I didn't say the employees wanted corporations to unionize or not. The joke was corporations interrupting employees asking if they can also unionize.