Isn’t that how exams are always supposed to be done?

1/3 is testing knowledge alone, 1/3 is testing your ability to apply this knowledge to problems and 1/3 is testing your ability to transfer your knowledge to new contexts.

Example for maths:

Knowledge: Provide the formula to solve any quadratic equation.

Apply knowledge: Solve this quadratic equation: […]

Transfer knowledge: [Some long text problem requiring you to translate it into mathematical terms and then solve it]

Gleichschaltung took a bit of time for the nazis.

The Night of the Long Knives is only applicable if the judge herself were a nazi who is seen as a potential threat due to being slightly differently aligned than the main faction.

AI is worthless if you are unable to tell hallucination from fact.

But just like NP hard problems, verifying a given solution is much easier than coming up with one yourself.

A photographer without a camera cannot produce art though. They can imagine it, explain it and even make a rough sketch - but the end result isn’t art. It’s a concept for art that is not yet made reality.

Similarly, there are differing levels of effort in order to create AI art. For instance, someone using an LLM to create an AI picture has approximately as much artistic merit as someone using their phone to take a selfie. It requires roughly the same amount of effort as well.

But for other AI art, it can take a lot of time to get everything right. I’ve dabbled with Stable Diffusion two years ago and there is a lot of finetuning and parameters you had to set to get anything worthwhile. My attempts roughly looked like taking a photo with random brightness, contrast and exposure settings: like utter trash. With some time and practice one could likely get adept at manipulating whatever model one is using and generate plenty of images with purpose.

Most AI generated images have little to no artistic merit, just like most pictures taken with a smartphone camera. But you cannot conclude that any and all art with either of those tools is therefore impossible.

having the ability to create art from scratch is what makes someone an artist

This implies photographers aren’t artists though. They rely on a specific tool - the camera - and utilize it to create art. This ranges from “just” taking pictures to setting up elaborate scenes.

Another example - for which I have forgotten the name - is art utilizing computers. Not in the sense of anything digital but rather electronic calculating machines built to beep, boop and blink. I’ve been to an exhibition which featured this type of art by one artist. Some were interactive, some weren’t, some were (partially) broken after decades of age and some were still functioning. Most were built during the 60s to 90s by the way. I believe the artist never did created any other art, at least publicly. He was an artist nonetheless.

I’d say AI art is art. Any definition of artistry which attempts to exclude AI art must also exclude other unconventional art forms.

The question shouldn’t be what art is or isn’t anyways. Such questions often lead to gatekeeping or nazis. Rather, it should be about the meaning of art. And most of AI art has the sole meaning of looking decent. AI art cannot ever replace more meaningful art as it alone lacks much meaning. It may at most supplement it, with some artists perhaps using AI deliberately as part of a work.

It assumes the man is being imprisoned for just cause

Guantanamo Bay doesn’t rely on any cause though? It’s literally a US torture camp where nothing matters. No due process, no just cause, no nothing. It’s worse than CECOT in everything but scale.

Have you ever seen any country’s opposition figure successfully demand something from another country? I personally haven’t. Usually the government alone controls any and all foreign relations.

Hell, Israel has literally detained and deported two British MPs on a parliamentary delegation - not just a visit. And they’re part of the governing party, no less!

It’s genuinely not surprising that El Salvador reacts this way. It’s the literal default reaction to a nongovernmental politician demanding something.

And yes, I think it’s appalling that the I US deports anyone and everyone, legally or otherwise. This doesn’t affect El Salvador though since they detain whoever the US sends there. The US argues this man is a terrorist, therefore this is sufficient justification for them.

Had Britain started deporting migrants to Rwanda and a MP from the Green Party requested to visit someone “mistakenly” deported, they would’ve been denied access as well.

I just really don’t think there’s anything noteworthy in the rejection alone.

It should be fairly normal to decline a random politician from another country a request no one else gets.

It reeks a bit of American exceptionalism that US senators should get special rights. If a random politician from, say, the Netherlands asked to see someone held in Guantanamo Bay the US will do fuck all to accommodate this request.

My comment is not a justification for the deportation of that guy by the way. I just don’t think it should be notable, as random politicians usually enjoy much, much fewer rights than head of states.

Oh, fuck off.

I’m not using my glass rectangle just to be reminded of that.

The cases where large companies do win won’t make news though. “Large companies settles with individual” isn’t really headline material now, is it?

Also, small companies != people. Neither me nor you are a company and even small companies have significantly more resources available to them than someone who just created the next Lord of the Rings and didn’t see a penny.

There are significantly more companies who would rather start killing politicians than see IP law gone. They rake in billions of shareholder value, much moreso than any AI company out there.

I never argued that copyright law is necessarily wrong or bad just because we went millenia without it. What I am arguing is that these laws do not allow people to create intellectual works as people in the past were no less artistic than we are today - maybe even moreso.

Have you seen the impact of IP law on science? It’s horrible. No researcher sees any money from their works - rather they must pay to lose their “rights” and have papers published. Scientific journals have hampered scientific progress and will continue to do so for as long as IP law remains. I would not be surprised if millions of needless deaths could have been prevented if only every medical researcher had access to research.

IP law serves solely large companies and independent artists see a couple of breadcrumbs. Abolishing IP law - or at the very least limiting it to a couple of years at most - would have hardly any impact on small artists. The vast, vast, VAST majority of artists make hardly any money already. Just check Bandcamp or itch.io and see how many millions of artists there are who will never ever see success. They do not benefit from IP law - so why should we keep it for the top 0.1% of artists who do?

the chimp would tell the bear

I thought the bear had died?

The rich want to do it because of AI. That’s it.

They can already take whatever you create wihout giving you a dime. What are you gonna do, sue a multi-billion dollar company with a fleet of attorneys on standby? With what money?

They would certainly just settle and give you a pittance just about large enough to cover your attorney fees.

Do you know why companies usually don’t do this? Because they have sufficiently many people hired who do nothing but create stories for the company full time. They do not need your ideas.

Copyright didn’t exist for millenia. It didn’t stop authors from writing books.

Is a hot dog stand a restaurant?

It’s a business with a kitchen, staff (1 person) and a dining area on occasion (foldable plastic chairs and tables).

I don’t think pedophile is accurate here.

It’s power difference why someone would want to “date” a 16 year old. It allows for very easy abuse which is usually the main motivation. Sexual attraction to children is less likely because far fewer people are pedophiles than abusers.

You are right. And snowing similarly implies that it’s cold outside. But you cannot reliably conclude whether it is snowing if you only know it is cold.

The number of people abusing social systems is a rounding error.

At least in Germany, there are so many barriers in place to prevent ““leeches”” that people who are actually in need of social support don’t have any access. Which is the entire point of erecting barriers might I add.

It’s because of this image:

It went viral on Chinese social media and was quickly censored by the state. As a result, comparing Xi to Winnie the Pooh became a symbol of resistance in China.

For more detail:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Winnie-the-Pooh_in_China

Not quite. Immigrants intend to stay forever, while expats don’t (in my opinion).

That is, if these self-called “expats” do intend to stay forever and obtain citizenship they very much are immigrants who don’t want to call themselves immigrants.

Chambers, who has lived in Thailand for years, specializes in studying the influence of the Thai military, which plays a prominent role in the nation’s politics.

This is the sole reason for the arrest. Besides, why are you arguing someone who has lived in a country for years is just a guest?

Why would you sleep on the floor or force your poor friend to sleep on the floor though?

What if it’s a diving competition?