Juliate

12 ms·

211.
by Juliate 1y ago
Rape is fundamentally about power, control and the violation of consent. The casual dismissal of artists' fundamental rights to control their work and how they are used is a part of a larger cultural problem, where might would rule ove
212.
by Juliate 1y ago
Here, we have the equivalent of Jack posting a stern issue, without proposal, without rationale, without previous involvement in the project. And Elon doing a +1. Two bros who are not the least committed to what they're suggesting, and
213.
by Juliate 1y ago
Artistic expression does not « move on » without me, or people. Artistic expression is people in motion, alone or in groups. You’re talking about the economics of performances and artefacts, which are _something else_ out of artistic expres
214.
by Juliate 1y ago
Laughable. What would be gatekeeping is if someone prevented you to pick a pencil, paper, a guitar, a brush, to make something out of your own. You’re the only one gatekeeping yourself here. Looks like it’s the same pattern as with blockcha
215.
by Juliate 2y ago
You’re sure? How? And what crowd? I am stating my viewpoint, from an education in humanities AND tech, and from 25 years of career in software tech, and 30 years of musician and painter practice. Sorry but who is moving the goalpost here? W
216.
by Juliate 2y ago
> This is very similar to a human... A machine, software, hardware, whatever, as much as a corporation, _is not a human person_.
217.
by Juliate 2y ago
> Nothing was stolen from the artists but instead used without their permission. Which is equally illegal. > disregarding copyright law because that is circular reasoning This is not circular, copyright is non-negotiable.
218.
by Juliate 2y ago
Humans have communicated with animals for millennia... what are you talking about? that animals are not conscious living entities, but that your software is? Please... Before having an autonomous artificial conscious entity, having somethin
219.
by Juliate 2y ago
It's not the only objection, but it's one of the major and blocking ones, because how do you _prove_ that you do not have unconsented copyrighted contents in your training set? The other objections, in the economic range (replacin
220.
by Juliate 2y ago
This. And the latency of actions, of loading, it abysmal. I don’t care that it becomes of the network being online or not. Find a way. If the network is slow or off, why should I depend on it to access my own music library navigation of any
221.
by Juliate 2y ago
There is a third and fourth red flag, is it conscious or not I don’t know. I am not even speaking of « do the users feel what it is ». Here it is: If some people are so enthusiastic and ruthless defenders of AI generators that were trained
222.
by Juliate 2y ago
Not the same thing again. That comparison would be fair if the generative AI you use is trained exclusively on your own (rightfully acquired) data and work. Existing generative AIs are feeding on the work of millions of people who did not c
223.
by Juliate 2y ago
You’re confusing the tools (which are their own marvels) and the practice (which is art, using the tools). However good or not is the camera, it’s not the camera that dictates the inner qualities of a photograph, there is _something else_ t
224.
by Juliate 2y ago
Ludicrous rebuttal. Reducing this to "orientation of the camera" is such a dismissive take on the eye and focus of the person that decides to take a picture, where/when he/she is; this is really revealing you do not prac
225.
by Juliate 2y ago
Who talked about "real" here? Photographers do manipulate cameras, and rework afterwise the images to develop. Digital artists do manipulate digital tools. Their output is a large function of their informed input, experience, tast
226.
by Juliate 2y ago
> But the notion that sentences should take no account of their consequences for politics or governance is misguided. The judiciary is part of the democratic system and as such, is as legitimate as the electoral process: not above, not b
227.
by Juliate 2y ago
You (don't) think a lot of things. It's probably. So you think. What about some data, then? > I don't even think most world population has a tattoo. Tattoo is a booming business (around 9% growth in 2024). There are stats.
228.
by Juliate 2y ago
> Are you suggesting everybody gets a trial before they are deported? Well, yes, because that's precisely what due process is? If "everybody" doesn't get a trial before a judge, if _you_ happened to be taken by ICE[1]
229.
by Juliate 2y ago
Yes. And there's comparatively less incentive to go into the USA... where you have higher chances to get assaulted, even by CPB/ICE/police, or shot, by anyone, than anywhere in the EU. You may also not take the lottery ticket
230.
by Juliate 2y ago
Are the USA (Trump) changes a long term trend? Or just a foolish irrational skit they'll take on decades to come back from, if ever? Is the media coverage supposed to entertain the powers that be, or to report things as they are?
231.
by Juliate 2y ago
This is not really... what you expect it is, I think. There are more people killed in mass shootings in the USA every year than there have been people killed in attacks during Christmas in Europe, like, ever.
232.
by Juliate 2y ago
And they're much more consistent/predictable than the US, at this point.
233.
by Juliate 2y ago
...yes? The risk is now definitely higher (and advertised by your own administration) than in many other destinations on Earth.
234.
by Juliate 2y ago
That's no rationale for the treatment she got. If USAmericans got such a treatment anywhere in the world for similar reasons, it'd be broadcasted as a diplomatic incident in your news channels.
235.
by Juliate 2y ago
And sometimes, off-topic becomes the topic, not figuratively, but in very concrete and definitive ways, because it was repeatedly set aside, brushed off or minimised before.
236.
by Juliate 2y ago
What is not fuzzy is the depth of disappointment and distrust the US has gained across the Atlantic Ocean. Which has long-term economical, cultural and political consequences. Dealing with a friend is certainly different than dealing with a
237.
by Juliate 2y ago
> if they intended to keep the product flowing into the US. At which point, the product costs much more to US consumers. I'm not sure there's a single other example in nature where select members of a species get special reward
238.
by Juliate 2y ago
2024 was a different time, a different era, even. The context has significantly changed, just several weeks after January 2025.
239.
by Juliate 2y ago
There are bigger markets than the USA in the world. Some that are even more prepared in the face of rising costs of petrol and gas, and that have seen this "Trump" hypothesis coming for several months, if not years. USA is 17% of
240.
by Juliate 2y ago
The article isn't clear to what actual end this will help America. Or more precisely, to whom end. And it misses key related points: who are interested in more local production? who will produce in what factories in the US? and who wil

More ›