yyprum

If they don't do this we'd not know it doesn't change ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The artist is not the same as the work.

The world of Harry Potter, the books, the movies, future shows or whatever involve a lot more people than just this fucking idiot shit writer. And a shitty person can anyway create a good thing that helps people.

Now in this case where the author is still alive, let people enjoy harry Potter stuff, while asking people to not send money her way. Help people pirate her books if they really want to read them, pirate the shows and movies. Better yet, make those involved in the shows and movies voice their opinion against her, make the money going to those works support trans people to counter JK. Make her see her works support the causes she hates.

Alienating people for liking some book series, movie or show that was made, paid, produced, written or whatever by some asshole won't help the situation. In other words, in this case, harry Potter is not the problem, it's the author.

NVidia is a hardware company. I guess that would put it closer to the PC in your question than AI. But neither is a proper description, PC is the whole thing you go to buy somewhere, and NVIDIA doesn't sell PCs, they sell PC pieces. They don't develop AI either as far as I know. The hardware they design and build might be more aimed to one direction or other, but no matter the usage, what they do is create hardware.

AI, graphics cards... That's just the marketing to sell what they build.

You can turn invisible but only parts that are alive, in essence, cells. Your nails, your hair, the food you've eaten, pee... All can be seen though.

This has been my path so far, nearly to a T. Got an old laptop, installed endeavour with a very light DE and attached an external drive and started messing with *arrs and jellyfin and bunch of other things.

The only downside is that my family now relies on that for watching so I'm more careful of not breaking the stuff that works.

Got another laptop that had no use so I started playing around on it. Installed Debian and CasaOS on top to test if that would be a nice alternative.

The only real issue is the lack of time to spend on this.

I've gone to check the account, seeing what I saw, I'm leaning on the fact that this might actually be a real person. In fact I hope it is an AI account to create engagement, because such real people make me lose more faith in humanity than any AI would.

Just see his job description, it's such bullshit chain of nothing:

Empowering B2B Sales & Marketing Teams to Scale with LinkedIn™-Driven Lead Generation & Brand Building Services ▶ Boost Your Sales Pipeline ▶ LinkedIn™ Consulting, Training, and Management Services ▶ LinkedIn™ Top Voice

People are so happy to blame AI and LLMs for all sorts of stuff that it looks like they forget what the real problem is. The real problem here is not that it may be written by an AI, but the fact that there are actual people that write like that. That think they sound profound and careful while not scared by change... In general a whole layer of management and wannabes that try to sell an image of being something they are not.

That account might be full of AI generated crap, I didn't even bother to check it, the problem is not that it is AI, it's that there are people that really are just like that. Even without LLMs, LinkedIn was already like that. Notice how Hatchins doesn't say its an AI bot, he just says "this truly shows the LinkedIn experience".

Please show some respect, that's not fair to clowns

Yeah, there's legitimate complains against GAI and most of all the companies trying to lead it. But having a community where the only point of view accepted has to be direct and absolute hatred including towards people trying to look at adequate and ethical usage of the technology is just plainly bad and stupid just like any other social bubble.

And I could rebute to that, that if someone is interested enough to check it with AI then they were likely to try and check it anyway without AI, maybe it would take longer, it would be harder to find... But they'd be the intended audience that now are redirected elsewhere.

To quote myself:

It's a really complex topic that no simple straight answer would solve.

We could rebute again and again and again, and get nowhere because either option is hard to discuss as it is simply impossible to give proper data to prove anything. And worse, when defending the use of AI for it can lead to being told you are allowing it in the first place and that's not even telling how many people still believe that AI needs real sample images to produce those (whether the algorithm is trained or not on CP is irrelevant on this particular point, as it is not needed to be created)

Hmm.. In my mostest most humblest of opinions, no, you didn't get carried away. You explained it in just the right amount. Maybe even stopped too soon, would have loved the version for Mac.