• HollowNaught@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    That weirdly smooth skin and odd hair shape behind the neck are reminiscent of AI

    Edit: Damn, I thought it was a pretty big consensus that AI was harmful to users and took away from human expression, but I seem to have found the last remaining bastion of the pro-AI movement here on Lemmy

      • HollowNaught@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        13 days ago

        I wish more places adopted either tagging or outright banning of AI images

        The least the user can do is be upfront about AI usage

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          13 days ago

          It’s a meme. They aren’t trying to fool you into thinking it’s something that it’s not. It’s not like it’s misinformation.

          • HollowNaught@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            13 days ago

            Yes, but it uses an ungodly amount of power to produce an image from a plagiarism machine when there are many other femchad meme formats out there

            • JackbyDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              I’m not saying I like AI images or think people should use them more often, I’m saying in this context I don’t this a disclaimer is needed. If the only problem is “I don’t like AI images because they’re bad” just down vote or suggest to community moderators and/or instance moderators to ban AI images.

        • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          that’s fair. I just thought this one was particularly obvious. like it isn’t even trying to not be ai.

          I’m on the fence on this being a specific problem though. the individual tokens don’t actualy take that much energy or water or whatever. the resource use is all in training. all of the infrastructure being built for ai right now is for training the next model. this looks like it was done with a model from a couple generations ago. like if you don’t want to use a product that’s bad for the environment then using an older model should be fine. especially if you run it locally, which is totally doable. this image looks like it used an older model.

          as for plagiarism, this is a meme with no profit potential. if the internet cared about copyright in memes we would never share any image macros. the chad face that this is based on is also stolen art that the internet has been sharing for years. that’s what memes are. stolen art shared without permission with no profit motive.

          I’m a professional photographer/videographer who has directly felt ai hurt my career. it has also been trained off of my own images against my will. I generally hate ai, but i like to be an informed hater. all that said, there’s really no moral grounds to hate this but not a version with the non ai Chad face.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      13 days ago

      Are you familiar with the “Chad” meme? The whole point is the over-the-top obvious, smack-you-in-the-face image editing.

      • HollowNaught@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        13 days ago

        There is a difference between editing, and asking a program to make an entirely new, weird looking image using half a sun in power and more data than the entirety of twitter

        • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          I pretty strongly doubt that even without power usage or quantity of training data that people would stop gatekeeping prompt-generated imagery. It’s a whole personality trait to put on whatever the yiff equivalent of grinder is now.

    • PugJesus@piefed.socialM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      14 days ago

      Unfortunately, Guy de Lusignan was a bit of a twit, and the Frankish nobility were right to not want him on the throne. He got into a quarrel with the legendary Saladin (not as legendary at the time, but having just fucking united a vast empire taking up much of Turkish-occupied Anatolia and the Arab world, making him a bit of a threatening opponent for a little crusader-state to be picking fights with) and ended up losing everything in the process, including Jerusalem itself, to Saladin, kicking off the (largely unsuccessful, though very eventful) Third Crusade.

  • rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    14 days ago

    Sibylla no, she will not let him go

    Let him goooo

    Sibylla, she will not let him go

    Let him go-o-o-o-o

    She will not let him gooooooooo

    • cjoll4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      No, her son Baldwin V was king. Guy was Baldwin V’s stepfather. Baldwin V died in childhood which made Sibylla the Queen, and her husband was temporarily the King-Consort or Prince-Consort or whatever the appropriate term was for a Queen’s husband at the time.

      But in this particular time and place, the Queen’s husband typically became King at coronation and assumed the role of monarch in her place. This is what everyone expected to happen. All the vassals hated Guy and wanted her to pick someone else.

  • MoribundMurdoch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    13 days ago

    The 2005 Kingdom of Heaven movie really did Guy and Sibylla dirty. I’m fairly sure the history was especially distorted because the writer and director were atheists and clung too tightly to a “religious tolerance is ideal” message, even at the expense of accurately portraying the actions of the actual historical figures.

    • zemo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I see what you mean but I will always love that movie (the directors cut) for many reasons, one being its portrayal of philosophy.