Then they obviously don’t understand it very well since it’s still somehow providing them with novelty. Seriously, the parlor trick has a threshold if you’ve seen it enough. I happen to think object permanence is beyond infants but by your logic that would also be pretense because I just I haven’t met a baby yet who had it.
And as I’ve mentioned before, I’m pretty stupid. The fact that the “infinite art machine” couldn’t keep an ape like me pressing the novelty button kind of speaks to its inability to create anything meaningful. I am a very low bar for overcoming pattern recognition.
Ah, yes, because the disagreeing with you means “infatuated by the random picture machine”, right? No room for someone to think that it’s, I don’t know, another tool a person can use in the creation of art? Kinda like how not every cellphone picture is high art, but you wouldn’t say you can’t use a camera to make art.
But no, clearly you’re the arbiter of knowing how stuff works and, what art is, and how others appreciate it.
object permanence is beyond infants but by your logic that would also be pretense
Yes, because developmental psychology is exactly the same as “art critique”.
It’s pretentious because you’re responding to someone who disagrees with you by asserting that either they don’t understand the subject technically, or their entirely subjective experience of art is somehow lesser than yours.
There is definitely room for that. I have encountered several of the people you’re describing in this thread. They were rather nice.
If it seems like I’m being arbitrarily harsh on you and that one other guy, it’s probably because 12 hours later you’re still in this thread reply-guying everyone who disagrees with you into exhaustion. If I go “hey great point man” another master debate lord is going to come along and demand my time to do it again for his petulant take.
Kind of like how you’re doing now when somebody more well adjusted already got me to reconsider. Release me from this thread, I’m out of energy for AI debate bros
‘I’m bored now, you should check out all the other places this comment section went…’ but what kind of asshole replies to other people, an entire twelve hours after a thread started? Debates end exactly five hundred minutes after beginning! We will have ordnung! I claim to have reconsidered, in a way that’s a backhanded insult to whoever I’m talking to now, and if you expect that to produce a correction or apology for my original claims, get stuffed.
There he is. Speak of him and he comes like a dog. Well played millords your tantrum has made the comment section very cringeworthy and I learned a valuable lesson about interacting with anyone who mentions AI. Be sure to continue reaching out to me because I promise your raving will reach my inbox
Then they obviously don’t understand it very well since it’s still somehow providing them with novelty. Seriously, the parlor trick has a threshold if you’ve seen it enough. I happen to think object permanence is beyond infants but by your logic that would also be pretense because I just I haven’t met a baby yet who had it.
And as I’ve mentioned before, I’m pretty stupid. The fact that the “infinite art machine” couldn’t keep an ape like me pressing the novelty button kind of speaks to its inability to create anything meaningful. I am a very low bar for overcoming pattern recognition.
Ah, yes, because the disagreeing with you means “infatuated by the random picture machine”, right? No room for someone to think that it’s, I don’t know, another tool a person can use in the creation of art? Kinda like how not every cellphone picture is high art, but you wouldn’t say you can’t use a camera to make art.
But no, clearly you’re the arbiter of knowing how stuff works and, what art is, and how others appreciate it.
Yes, because developmental psychology is exactly the same as “art critique”.
It’s pretentious because you’re responding to someone who disagrees with you by asserting that either they don’t understand the subject technically, or their entirely subjective experience of art is somehow lesser than yours.
There is definitely room for that. I have encountered several of the people you’re describing in this thread. They were rather nice.
If it seems like I’m being arbitrarily harsh on you and that one other guy, it’s probably because 12 hours later you’re still in this thread reply-guying everyone who disagrees with you into exhaustion. If I go “hey great point man” another master debate lord is going to come along and demand my time to do it again for his petulant take.
Kind of like how you’re doing now when somebody more well adjusted already got me to reconsider. Release me from this thread, I’m out of energy for AI debate bros
Toxic even in retreat.
‘I’m bored now, you should check out all the other places this comment section went…’ but what kind of asshole replies to other people, an entire twelve hours after a thread started? Debates end exactly five hundred minutes after beginning! We will have ordnung! I claim to have reconsidered, in a way that’s a backhanded insult to whoever I’m talking to now, and if you expect that to produce a correction or apology for my original claims, get stuffed.
There he is. Speak of him and he comes like a dog. Well played millords your tantrum has made the comment section very cringeworthy and I learned a valuable lesson about interacting with anyone who mentions AI. Be sure to continue reaching out to me because I promise your raving will reach my inbox
Troll, your shit shows up in context links for other replies. I gotta scroll past you claiming absolution, en route to “I shidded.” Fuck you.
You told me to look elsewhere, and I find you sneering about how you’re done sneering.