I actually have that line (replete with the emoji 🗑️ which you snipped) set as a text editor macro. Minor variations thereof are in
many of my forum posts—also, variations of the wolf photo.
Well, even if you are suggesting that such evidence had been easy to gather, I feel that I now have my own.
Speaking of bots, I am now just waiting for the liberal
TDS conspiracy theorists to announce that I am a “Russian bot”.
...
some lunatic is trying to get users banned for posting unattributed and/or copyrighted images to the Wall Observer. ...
Taм был дaльний зaxoд c пoдвыпoдвepтoм. He yймeтcя никaк cyчьe лayдoвcкoe плeмя в дeлeжкe кopытa.
Чyвaк дaжe нe зaмopaчивaлcя c пoдcчeтoм, пpoxoжy ли нa гoлocoвaниe или нeт бeз нoyнeйм шaйки oт лayды. [...]
[...]
Пиздapики нa вoздyшнoм шapикe, и eщe
я пoлyчил твoй oтвeт и пoнял чтo тeбe cлeдyeт вытaщить xyй изo pтa (плoxo cлышнo). He зaбyдь пocмoтpeть этo Youtube видeo, кoтopoe oтpaжaeт твoю нaтypy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl_pxCAcJz4Every bot must be from somewhere, and why not russia?
Perhaps you did not understand: Among other things, in the quoted portion, he made a rude remark about Lauda.
—My blowtorch gets results!
Lauda is a popular topic too, but I would suspect that since she left, her popularity is likely to diminish in the coming years, and become more of a myth than anything... even though her typed words will still exist - especially since she did not embark upon a deletion spree... which is likely better for keeping some accuracy intact.
WhiteManWhite has left the forum.
That's a plot twist
I need to catch up on the Russian forum thread. I abandoned it after a moderator deleted two of my posts. Eh, it seems to be less of a priority now...
You have more energy than me. I do have some threads that I follow in other languages and Google translate them to English.. but I really have trouble following any of them in detail.. .. even if I might spot a post here or there that strikes my interest.
I am NOT much into either competition or even being a meanie... I feel that I employ meanie only from time to time.. and surely some members do bring meanie out.. but it is NOT really my preferred way of interacting with members - even though some members don't seem to recognize or appreciate any other approach. Regarding competition, I do sometimes compete with myself, or I might compete with some other member in a more non-stated way...
I remember about 20 years ago competing with a colleague from work over an athletic event that was kind of a serious competition but at the same time fun... and it did go well for me, even though there was a bit of a nail-biter aspect to the whole thing because it took several months to play out.. and then even when it went in my favor, the competition did not really end at that point, and arguably that colleague did end up subsequently taking the lead in the whole matter in a kind of passive aggressive way.. which surely, life happens and sometimes we do need to recognize certain ways that we might end up getting bested at a later date.
Difficult to measure meanie status results, too, is it not?
I agree that in regards to "meanie" being a constructive meanie would likely be a better thing, and you and I seem to agree that Lauda would have fit into a kind of constructive meanie status, even though other members are not necessarily going to agree - especially if they had gotten red claw marks from her.. that are still enduring, since she has now exited this matrix.
But that is something that I would take up elsewhere; it does not seem relevant in WO, whereby the current primary topics of discussion are Nully with his blowtorch, adversarial network generation of nonexistent cats, and also Bitcoin.[/size]
hahahahaha....
It is funny how peeps in the WO thread will just make shit up regarding whatever our current WO topic happens to be... even though in the end, on the deep inside each of us realize that despite some short term divergences along the way, king daddy remains our topic herein.
Jay, thanks for the discussion re Lauda. I read and appreciate your long, detailed replies; if I don’t respond point by point, it is only because I would prefer to talk about myself now! —Or about Kitty AI. —Or about Communist subversion of the arts. —Or—as long as I am here, maybe even sometimes about Bitcoin. Fair enough.
On the Making of Nonexistent CatsProtip: It is more complicated than cat /dev/null.
but surely life happens
Indeed. Life goes on. 😼
Not sure about GAN... I did watch almost half of the video without conceding whether I understood any of what I saw/heard.
A simple, very non-rigorous explanation:
You know the general class of nifty AI technologies that make image search, facial recognition, the visual cortex for self-driving cars, etc., etc.?
Well, it turns out that if you put two different
AI bots in a feedback loop, you can make one bot train the other to
produce the class of images that the first bot has already been trained to recognize.
So: Train one bot to recognize cat photos. Make the other bot start producing more or less randomly generated images; and force it to learn to fool the cat photo recognizer into believing that a nonexistent cat is a real cat.
When you run this little bot versus bot game on a big pile of expensive GPUs for a week or two, the cat-recognizer bot teaches the nonexistent-cat bot to produce fake cat photos that can fool humans. 😸
It is such a powerful technology, it can even produce
KYC dox photos of nullius! O.k. Thanks for that shortened explanation.
I could kind of appreciate that the clip was going in that direction as I got to about half way through watching the clip, but I did not want to spend another 14 minutes on it in order to watch it all the way to the end...
Sorry about my own attention-span weakness...
Funny about that link that you provided. Each time I click on (or refresh) it, it gives me a new image... so surely an interesting concept about computers generating images that appear to be reality-based.
Sure, it is a kind of geeky phenomena, but I do remain a little bit unclear why I would want to spend a lot of time playing around with such computer generations, unless I am actually either studying the concept of computer generation or just having some fun with it... So, for example, let's say that there are only 24 hours in a day, and I were to spend about 8 hours sleeping, 4 hours engaging in various tasks of arranging my day, 4 hours eating and exercising, 4 hours in money-making activities, 2 hours on the forum and 2 hours discretionary**.... Why would I necessarily want to spend my discretionary hours clicking on computer generated videos, or studying such phenomena?
**note, I am not necessarily proclaiming/or admitting that I dedicate my daily hours as outlined above
Poll
