Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - BillO

Pages: < Back  1 [2] 3 4 ... 24  Next >
21
Not an idiot per se,
Ahhh .. thanks .. maybe?


but I have a sneaking suspicion you've never produced a digital painting,
True.

and that you don't understand the work that ordinarily goes into it.
Not quite.  While not very involved in visual art I have decent experience in producing digital music.  I do have an appreciation of the amount of work required to produce artistic works from that perspective.  Please keep in mind there are two main aspects to digitally produce music.  Live performance is not what I'm talking about, but rather music composed using a computer.


It's the only way you could make this comment:

However ..

Quote
.. he won in the digital art category ..

I'm still not convinced we all need to run for the hills screaming tough.
I'll have to disagree here.  I assume you've read my previous comments on this.


and think that it somehow diminished the issue. You're clearly dismissive of the form, and it is my opinion that it's rooted in inexperience.
No, I'm not dismissive of the form at all (I guess you did not read my previous comments).  I am also not diminishing the issue either.  I'm facing facts.

Actually I'm quite amazed at all the younger people's reactions.  I'm the old guy here and have, on this very site, been accused of being stodgy and set in my ways.  Apparently though it seems I'm the only one looking down the road.  Change is nigh.  It's gong to happen.  Saying that is not diminishing the issue, it's facing it.  I have personally been put out of work due to technological progress.  Instead of crying about it I made changes and got on with life.  Just like people have been doing for millennia.

He did not: https://boingboing.net/2022/08/31/jason-allen-takes-1st-place-in-digital-category-at-colorado-state-fair-with-ai-generated-content.html
Thanks for posting that.  Having an AI category would be appropriate going forward.

22
BillO, out of curiosity, what do you think "digital art" entails?
Art created digitally, e.g. with the aid of a computing device.

You really think I'm an idiot, eh Pete?

I was just noting they did not try to get it by as something else.

Also, the article was not clear on whether or not it was disclosed as being an AI creation before it was evaluated.  That would be interesting to know.

23
Yeah, its bound to happen.

However ..

Quote
.. he won in the digital art category ..

I'm still not convinced we all need to run for the hills screaming tough.

24
Science & Alternative Science / Debunker's tool kit.
« on: September 01, 2022, 02:27:18 PM »
Carl Sagan's list as presented by Mr. Skeptic himself.

Following these will help you decide what is bunk and what is not.

1. How reliable is the source of the claim?

2. Does the source make similar claims?

3. Have the claims been verified by somebody else?

4. Does this fit with the way the world works?

5. Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?

6. Where does the preponderance of evidence point?

7. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science?

8. Is the claimant providing positive evidence?

9. Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory?

10. Are personal beliefs driving the claim?


25
You are the only one who seems to think that eyewitness accounts do not constitute scientific data.

"Eyewitness" accounts cover quite a spectrum.  Some would certainly be considered scientific data (doing an experiment and making careful observations repeated many times and averaged over time) and others not really (I saw it for about 1/4 of a second out of the very corner of my eye.  I was more concentrated on driving, but I'm sure of what it was) and still others that are just utter junk (she swears her friend's uncle's story about being told by an old guy he met fishing that he actually saw the sasquatch picking it's nose, can be taken to the bunk, er .. bank).

That last category covers the "eyewitness accounts" we find in the Bible.

26
There are many fake Christians who are mouth pieces of satan. He spends 24/7 trying to deceive us,such as lying about the shape of the earth
Are you related to J-Man?

27
Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: August 31, 2022, 05:02:39 PM »
You sound as if Satan is within you.repent, cry out foor the blood sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST
Well according to your feeble take on religion I am a product of your God.  Accordingly he made me the way I am and knew exactly how I'd turn out.  So, it's all his fault and therefore up to him to correct his error.

28
Just so you know, I do not put all people of faith into the "religious nut bag" category.  On several other threads you are in arguments with AllAroundTheWorld (AATW) is a person of faith, yet still takes the time to understand and support a scientific approach.  He is obviously enlightened and educated even if we do not agree on the nesseccary existence of God.  I am sure there are others here too.

Not that it would matter to the dyed-in the wool nut bag, though, seeing as wanton ignorance is your MO.

29
Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: August 31, 2022, 04:44:03 PM »
I'll take that as a win
Ahh, the coward's cheer!

Delude yourself as you wish and hope your dome doesn't suck the will to live out of you.

30
I'm stoked.

The launch window conflicts with a very important race (AMA Pro MX final) I have promised to watch with others, but that's what split screen is for, right?

Artemis takes precedent as the racing does not get realy interesting until after the window closes.

31
Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: August 31, 2022, 01:54:16 PM »
Okay, I am out of any further discussion with you going forward.  Peace.

32
Sorry but how did the big bang happen? everything came from nothing? an explosion created something? makes no sense
You didn't watch the video, did you?  Nor have you read anything written by a scientist about the "Big Bang" have you?  If you had done either of those you would have known the Big Bang was neither an explosion nor a big bang.  Those terms only have meaning if you can define them with respect to the universe when they occurred.  Science can't do that because according the the "Big Bang" hypothesis the universe had not taken on any form at t=0.  All that aside, the "Big Bang" is not the only guess at what happened.

As Hossenfelder clearly stated, we don't know where the universe came from.  The "Big Bang" (with the above caveats) is just a working hypothesis on it's evolution and nowhere in that hypothesis does it claim what happened to initiate t=0 except that it is hypothesized the current space and time we call the universe came into existence during that event.  We don't know what existed before that or what form it took nor do we make any claims along those lines

It is the religious nut bags that believe that some magical monkey wiggled his finger and the universe popped into existence out of nothing and was fully formed in 6 days.  That is NOT what mainstream science thinks, it is religious bunk.

33
Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: August 31, 2022, 01:31:07 PM »
Refraction from the dome allows light to be sucked up and filtered out, so the sun appears how it does.
Wonderful.  Can you kindly give me the mathematics for this?

34
Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: August 31, 2022, 02:11:52 AM »
RE sun stats are absurd when you look at the sun. NASAs pictures show a orange ball surrounded by light 93 million miles away...and we get a large yellow ball and yellow light. ....?????

I'd say the sun is about 50 miles across, and maybe 100,000 feet in the air(lowest point or obviously it would engulf us). Eyeball estimate
Really?!  Did you even think about what you just wrote?

If the sun was 50 miles across and 19 miles away (as you suggest) it would subtend a visual angle of about 105 degrees.  In other words it would take up more than half the sky.  In reality the Sun subtends an angle of about .5 degrees.

Your eyeball is in need of some adjustment.

35
How hard is it for you to understand there is a dome above us and nothing goes up very far.
Not hard at all.  All we have to do is look at who's making that claim and we understand completely.  So, J-Man, rest in that we understand exactly what you mean.

On topic though, I am watching this closely.  I hope they can make the next window, but I'd rather they get it right even if they have more work to do.

36
Always worth 15 minutes.


37
Couldn't find the other one I mentioned but came across this one while I was looking.  Skip ahead to 7:50


38
rooster, I'm in tune with your sentiment, but I do think you might be a bit of an idealist.

Do what you can to help out but progress will march on.

I watched a video a little while ago where the visuals, music and text were all created by AI.  It was, well, a little underwhelming.

I've been trying to find it again without success, but if I do I'll post it here.

Nonetheless, I'll take history's lesson and say we'll adapt.  Sure some will get offered a short stick (it has happened to me n my career) , but as a global society I'm confident we'll come out OK.

39
What percent would it take for you to no longer consider it a gay disease?
I may get a warning, or even a ban for this, but still it is pertinent to what is being discussed.  Tom and some others that frequent these boards can be considered Write Once Read Many [times, over and over again] individuals (WORMs).  Meaning they cannot unlearn whatever they initially "learned" (through abuse, religion [ repeat myself] or whatever).  This is pretty much absolute.  Any arguments about how the disease is propagated are irrelevant.  If Tom say's it's a "gay" disease, then it to him it is going to be a "gay" disease until he dies or contracts it.  Spare your efforts.  If you get close to cornering him, he will just go away.

I await the sword of the moderators.

40
However, I still worry that this changes the threat model for potential artists. Currently, you'll either make it big or you'll live an OK life producing art for commercial use - the kind that doesn't appeal to "the real patrons", but which clearly has its place in the world.

If AI were to take that segment over, your threat model becomes "you'll either make it big, or, uh, enjoy wasting half of your life becoming an expert at something nobody wants". How many people are going to take that risk?
Certainly there will be that aspect, but I am not convinced it will happen quickly enough to have much of an impact.  The first to be impacted will be the kind of folks that draw roosters on Kellogg's boxes and camels on cigarette packages.  But even that will not happen overnight.  Companies, especially those of long standing, are reluctant to change what works.  There will be resistance from the public too.  All in all, I think the change will happen, but it will happen gradually enough for most people to adjust their career choices.

History has shown us this many times over.  Take the printing press as an example.  It eventually put a lot of potential transcribers out of work, and since monasteries were where most of this work occurred, took away a huge amount of their income.  However there was resistance.  Printed material was initially very expensive too albeit not as expensive as hand scribed material. and there were quality issues.  Add to that the very limited supply of and huge cost of printing presses and society had ample time to adjust.

Pages: < Back  1 [2] 3 4 ... 24  Next >