zalack

NVIDIA’s marketing overhypes, but their technical papers tend to be very solid. Obviously it always pays to remain skeptical but they have a good track record in this case.

It’s a remake that uses new, higher quality assets though, so isn’t an option in this case.

Lol, for some reason this made me think of a scene from The Good Place:

Hey. You look happy. You get laid last night? I didn’t. Tried. Hard. This chick that I met after I followed her into a yoga class, but she wasn’t into it. Maced me. Right in the eyes. Stung like hell. What was I saying? Oh, yeah. Hey.

It’s because the producers want their counterparts spending time, energy, and perceived social capital negotiating over it rather than the things the Producers actually worry about having to give up.

IMO it’s pretty transparent, but creative people are pretty scared of AI right now so it might be a good bargaining tactic if they can get rank and file Union members to tie up the negotiatiors by reacting.

Crowd extensions are already pretty common with traditional VFX techniques.

I worked in Hollywood editorial for a bit and, IMO, the producers are playing up the AI stuff so that said stuff can be given to the writers and actors as a “victory” instead of the real spectres in the room:

• streaming residuals need to get the same payout and transparency as home video and syndication did

• streaming numbers need to be made available to creators to facilitate the above.

• the ‘mini-room’ system that totally disconnects writers from the productions they are writing for needs to be broken down.

I had completely forgotten about this meme.

That’s what I meant. The GUI is all that 95% of end users interact with.

Sure.

Lol. Brain fart. Fixed

Folders. At least to the end-user. Under the hood it’s Unix, so it wouldn’t be wrong to call them directories either.

That’s still the male gaze. Most women I know don’t care about bicep size. It’s one of those things men do to look more like other men they think have good bodies.

The scene with Tony Stark chopping wood is much closer to the female gaze, according to my friends at least. For them it’s all about the forearms and in general the type of body you get from real physical labor, not the kind of body you get from the gym

I think they are linked, though. Objectified male bodies tend to be the type of body that men in charge think is the ideal, the same way that objectified female bodies tend to be the type of body that men in charge think is the ideal.

Most of the women I talk to don’t really care for the ultra-built body type we tend to see in blockbusters. If they’re attracted to the leads it tends to be for other reasons that are orthogonal to them being jacked.

One of the goals behind breaking down the patriarchy is removing the singular vision that our culture tends to have on a lot of issues, since our culture is run predominantly by a single demographic. I don’t think sexualized imagery would ever go away, but a higher variety of that imagery that caters to a wider variety of tastes might help with body image issues.

Men feeling shitty for not being jacked, women feeling shitty for not being slim and large-breasted, black women feeling shitty about their hair, black and asian men feeling shitty about their features because so much of our beauty standards are set on white individuals… It’s all particular flavors of the same underlying issue. There’s no harm in adding women have been talking about this for decades. Let’s team up and stop this bullshit.

I agree. I’m not trying to shut down that conversation, just contextualize it a bit and have it be part of both conversations. Both conversations are linked so I don’t see why that wouldn’t be natural.

I don’t. I see a comment trying to draw a distinction between the way that unrealistic bodies tend to be contextualized in our culture. It doesn’t say that they don’t cause body issues for men.

I don’t disagree. In these discussions though there almost always are a few comments that try to make the case that men actually have it just as bad as women, and I think it’s good to challenge that.

You can support what men have to deal with while also acknowledging that it’s infinitely more oppressive towards women. I think it’s often hard for some people not to mention it because it’s like, yes, feminists have been talking about this exact thing for decades, why is this a realization suddenly?

It happens, but it’s not pervasive. There’s nothing wrong with sexual imagery in a vacuum.

The issue for women is the sheer avalanche of bullshit. Images of half naked women with unrealistic bodies are EVERYWHERE. Billboards, magazine covers, commercials, etc.

I think it would be interesting to explore an API affordance for attaching licenses to fediverse content, with the admins being able to set a default license for their server.

So if Meta wants to get content from the fediverse, it has to check the headers of each post and make sure it’s licensed for commercial use.

Dude. Just let us have this.

Even if it’s just as a username? How would Google even know about that?

I’m not saying “sign in with Google” sign ins. Just that I use that email address as a username in a couple places

I have a couple accounts I use as usernames to log into stuff, but I couldn’t tell you if I’ve actually logged in to those email addresses in the last two years.