It's because a person can crank out a deep fake in 3 hours, and a crappy one in one. It never cropped up because... well lets be real it was a couple of weirdos that were doing it, unless it bubbles up from the dark corners of the internet you risk the Streisand effect by bringing attention to it.
AI can crank out 40 in a minute. 7200 in three hours. That's an entirely different beast. The sheer mass and volume ramps up the odds of any image bubbling up from the dark corners of the web falling into the limelight and now this problem that wasn't big enough to merit thought is rearing up it's ugly head right in front of us.
You can generate unique pictures of Taylor Swift faster than even Taylor swift can generate pictures of Taylor Swift. Within one hour of Taylor swift being seen with a man (and you have enough images of the man) you can create a dozen images of her on a date with that man and attempt to sell them to paparazzi.
The problem is volume. Just like how email made everyone connected and allowed the Nigerian Prince scandal to occur.
Yeah, there is a large fixation on whether he did or did not pull the trigger and I genuinely feel like that's not the straw that breaks the camel's back, because ultimately he was told it was a clear gun.
What matters is:
Did he know that there were serious concerns about gun safety on set?
Did he use his star power/producer role to silence those concerns?
Did he retaliate against people who raised those concerns?
If he did any of those three things, then you have a rapidly strengthening case that he knowingly endangered the crew, and he should have known NOT to have aimed that gun at anybody. You made that gun unsafe and then the gun went off in your hands because you reaped what you sowed.
look, I can understand the argument that you must vote for the most effective way to contain an evil. It's a good solid argument.
However it starts taking damage almost immediately when:
The plan to fight the evil is using the most disliked president in recent history to win a popularity contest.
They pre-emptively destroy any and all opportunities to find a better candidate to win the popularity contest against the evil.
They refuse to debate anybody just like the evil they want to defeat. Making it impossible to verify they're the one for the job.
They forcibly re-schedule the primary schedule to delay any signs that this plan might be a terrible idea.
Their age is seriously in question, their mental acuity is in question, and they also decide to dodge being in a completely unscripted environment for two hours while standing.
Certainly with all this you can at least understand why someone would rather vote third party, because this Biden option is not making me feel any safer.
At what point can we stop pointing the finger at the voters and start pointing at the guy they're "supposed to vote for"? Is there a point we can ever point that finger at Biden? Or is it like Trump,where we need to vote for him "even if he were to shoot someone in the street"?
... oh that's interesting. Creation of a phantom "limb" with a brain control interface? I wonder how much control there is? Does it just wiggle? Is it purely binary up/down? Can they control the angle?
I actually have a set of LED eyes that I control with puppetry, last I looked at BCIs it was woefully incapable of what I wanted but maybe I should look at this again...
Secondly (more controversially), is a picture of a noose racist? I mean, it certainly has racist connotations and I personally wouldn’t have used it, but (bear with me) I’m not sure racist is the concrete conclusion. Lots of people have been hung throughout history, if you’re not viewing it through a racial lens then are you a racist or just very insensitive.
I see what you're saying... but it seems like a technicality that's not worth exploring here.
If instead it was a guillotine with a caption of "this year's detention activity"... it's really not any better. Like it's no longer racist but... now it's just purely about killing kids in a more equitable homicidal format. It's very dark humor in a very public place.
It's a lot of time and effort and argument to debate "yeah this was terrible but it might not have been racist". Does a definitive answer of "at least it wasn't racist" make this appreciably any better? Does it make them any more likely to get a teaching job after this?
It also doesn't change the core argument the teacher is making in the story. "You lumped me in with a bunch of racists because I was white. I took down the image because it was offensive. Obviously. Why would I leave it up if it was offensive?"
It's "Can Biden and Trump stay coherent standing for 3 hours in an unscripted environment"? Does it matter if Biden wins if the match was predominantly two elders bickering over whether or not we should pull out of Iraq? Both of their ages are a point of concern and the complete lack of live, unscripted, hardball interviews does little to quell that fear.
Polls have never been this bad for a returning president in decades. Historically support for third party candidates have decreased as election cycles get closer but at the same time, you've never had candidates this hated. Third parties are absolutely going to eat up votes from both parties this election year, and a horrid debate performance, even if a win, will make the issue worse.
You know genuinely I don't understand why this isn't a thing. It's expensive to have two homes, especially when you aren't even sure you'll have the job for more than four years. It would lower the cost of entry into politics for people who do work minimum wage.
Shoving someone into a land full of surprise expenses seems like a perfect recipe for corruption.
Because not voting for Biden is absolutely not the same as voting for Trump. That I agree with. Not voting at all though is voting for either. Only by showing up and literally voting for neither is the only way to vote for neither of them.
I mean, that's a quest at it's core but a good game works it into a narrative and makes it blend. Ideally making all 6 steps anything but tedious. Ideally interesting and fun, but at all times avoiding tedious like the plague.
Two identical "perform quest for NPC"s, which is your step 4. Negotiate for a thing in a briefcase from somebody who probably will double cross you.
Which one is more tedious? Now combine a 4 minute run in a barren wasteland in your steps 1 and 6...
A few other things that Cyberpunk did, There are several ways to handle that mission, those several options can cause 3 major shifts in that faction. Which affect other missions later on, indeed any time you deal with the maelstrom gang.
Cyberpunk had a lot of flaws but, they're at least innovating. I've never been in a legit standoff like that in a game. It's always been in a static looping animation at 8 paces.
TLDR if you don't wanna watch the 20 minute segment:
Internet Historian used the Mental Floss article as a script for the video. The owners of the article made a DMCA takedown on the video as it was used without permission. Internet Historian has downplayed why it was taken down, reworded and removed swaths of the video to make it sound less like the article. Released the re-upload of Man in Cave with another video at the same time in order to try and distract from the story that he did indeed copy a little known article.
He does good work... but he also totally did copy the script of Man in Cave. Hbomberguy does a pretty good argument proving this.
Sounds like a wonderful story arc. Looking for a buyer for a kidney stone while at the exact same time, infuriatingly, fending off assassins trying to steal the kidney stone. Which you would ABSOLUTELY SELL TO THEM if they would just reach out.
Do you advertise even more publicly, risking more assassins? Or do you stay more quiet, do research, try to figure out why people want this stone so badly and yet won't just buy the damn thing?
I mean, in the era of VHS this won't work because ultimately you're fast forwarding and rewinding. So you're gonna watch it anyway. but in the digital era I thought this would be what any Police officer did?
Like... they're not even gonna spend 10 minutes on a theft?
Admittedly, there is no government housing for politicians, which means either buying renting in washington DC (not cheap) in addition to your home in your own state, or moving entirely to Washington DC for a position you may lose in 4 years.
The entire job seems to be closed out to everyone but millionaires.
It's because a person can crank out a deep fake in 3 hours, and a crappy one in one. It never cropped up because... well lets be real it was a couple of weirdos that were doing it, unless it bubbles up from the dark corners of the internet you risk the Streisand effect by bringing attention to it.
AI can crank out 40 in a minute. 7200 in three hours. That's an entirely different beast. The sheer mass and volume ramps up the odds of any image bubbling up from the dark corners of the web falling into the limelight and now this problem that wasn't big enough to merit thought is rearing up it's ugly head right in front of us.
You can generate unique pictures of Taylor Swift faster than even Taylor swift can generate pictures of Taylor Swift. Within one hour of Taylor swift being seen with a man (and you have enough images of the man) you can create a dozen images of her on a date with that man and attempt to sell them to paparazzi.
The problem is volume. Just like how email made everyone connected and allowed the Nigerian Prince scandal to occur.