braelen7

Of course not. Just a reminder of the delusional fucking assholes that live on this board.

I mean if you want to have that discussion then how do you differentiate fictional death and murder in movies and the written word vs AI generated nudity?

To me, it seems like we quickly get into the AI image equivalent of prosecuting the actor in a movie for committing the murder of a fictional character. We even go as far to have the entire genre of horror movies at mass Hollywood scale based around fictional death and murder.

It gets even stranger with sex and nudity when such a large % of people are online porn consumers. I have seen the figure for men at 90%. It is where I think the market will actually figure out the solution and that the porn consumer will want assurance the person is real and not AI.

What is disingenuous in this debate to me is that chatGPT estimates there might be over 100 million pictures of real naked people on the internet as of 2021 lol. It is like we are pretending these pictures don't already exist of real people at a huge scale and that no one really looks at them at huge scale now. It is only when AI starts cranking them out people will be so tempted and THAT is a big problem.

If anything, this is the much bigger problem that we can no longer discern the magnitude of a problem in the real world vs the R0 of the idea of a problem online.

"Since everyone is posting about AI generated nudity/porn, it must be a big problem."

Of course not. It wouldn't support the narrative. Just like I work for a firm that was 100% in the office before the pandemic, many processes still even being done with a large amount of paper.

Now we are 100% remote and never going back. I am sure we are not the only one but no one wants to click that story.

It is because you are listening to bullshit online too much.

I have lived in the US my whole life and I can't remember that last time I left a tip for anything besides a place that you sit down to eat and someone brings you food.

My first job was delivering pizza and that is something with a long social norm of tipping. A tip was a nice bonus but if someone didn't tip it didn't matter because someone else people would tip an irrationally large amount. I didn't think bad of those that didn't tip, I just assumed they were that broke.

It is not that "every one knows" it is that no one cares about this in the real world the way they do when grandstanding on social media.

It will hardly be surprising to see the burning of wood made illegal in my lifetime in many countries.

It is just an easy, visible target. It will be the easiest thing to demonize too. "What are you a caveman still? You need to burn wood?".

On top of that it is just not going to be a defensible position based on the amount of carbon released.

We are hardly headed towards a future that you have more choice in these matters than you do now.

I haven't met many monogamous couples under a certain age that have had things work out well either though.

My parents will celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary next year. I am pretty sure if they were younger there is no way they would not have got divorced. They are not unhappy but they are so different that there is no way one would not have thought they could do better if the early part of the marriage had been lived in modern times.

For me, being single is the ultimate form of being poly. I am committed to all the shorter relationships I have yet to experience in my life.

I have had several chances to be in true poly relationships but there has always been at least one, really annoying person with nothing else going on than being poly. Then every topic of conversation is about being poly and that is when I check out.

The idea of poly being mainstream is ridiculous because it is hard to find a single compatible person in time. True poly just multiplies the amount of incompatibility.

You are simply wrong. Falsifiability is what matters.