Array(16).join('wat' - 1) + ' Batman'Any conversation
@fastidiousprofilefollow
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." — Sid Meyerswrote:
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." — Sid Meyerswrote:Well, I think my IRCd (Eris v2) is close to be complete.
@stagas🤸profilefollow
creative technologist
creator of textlogreplied to@fastidiousprofilefollow"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." — Sid Meyers:
creative technologist
creator of textlogreplied to@fastidiousprofilefollow"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." — Sid Meyers:🥳
this is where I live. it’s a plateau. it’s quiet, we have cats and there are goats around and fig and pear trees.
Fired up street view on Google Maps to have a look around. It seems like a pretty relaxed and peaceful place to live. 🌞
I was obsessed with Greece as a kid because of The Chipmunk's Adventure movie where they were dancing on the statues, ha. I was more into he statues (even if cartoon) than the dancing, and yet I have still never been there (I'm 45).
Crete is beautiful, I remember being on vacation there many years ago and hiking a long gorge. It was a really great experience.
A lot of people write so much software to sandbox their AI agents.
I say don't bother. Just give your agent its own non-admin local user account. It's easier and much more effective.
I give my AI Full-Access. :p
My whole machine is set up to make way too much easily accessible with shell tools (email, stock trading, payments, mms group chats.) I can't trust it.
(Opinion) People don’t like generative AI because it made the {insert creativity} too easy. Saw the HN post on ‘AI music banned from top 40 chart in Australia’ and people had very strong opinions in both directions.
The hot take: If you’re ok with someone’s creativity being outsourced to others, then you should be ok with AI doing the same.
If “AI made this and I call it mine” is bad but “someone overseas on fivver made this and I call it mine” and it’s suddenly ok, time to self reflect.
…
My hot take: from the moment you use technology, be it an instrument, a synthesizer, a DAW, and now AI, it is still your idea, your effort, your time spent, and that makes it yours. Others can do the same if they choose. The same way someone chooses a classic guitar over a synthesizer, one can choose an AI over (insert ancient way of doing things).
…
You’re rolling the dice whenever you are searching for a sample or a preset in a synthesizer. Eventually it’s what “sounds good”, so still the effort is your judgement and the time spent finding that “dice roll” that sounded well.
I am not a musician, so I lack the jargon to properly explain what I mean.
I used AI for creative writing (nothing too fancy, TTRPG). There, the broader the dice roll, the more generic and uninteresting the results. Slop, if you will. It was surprisingly good to build up on ideas I had however.
I imagine muisic also has building blocks. Melodies, instruments, mixing, etc. AI can perhaps be used in a similar fashion there.
I heard a perspective I sort of like: if AI is a tool then acceptable AI use is, more or less, defined as "when my audience no longer notices or cares". It's dynamic like that. Bad photoshop is detectable and annoying, so are overusing presets. Your artistry needs to expand to meet the tool.
I don't know if I 100% like that or agree. At the same time, it's a pretty straightforward line, a practical take.