"To the Editor: We were unaware of Journal policies on image manipulation and had altered our submission by using an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to move the ruler to the top of the image. We therefore wish to retract our image and case report.1
Yuling Wang, M.Med.
Xiangdong Mu, M.D
"
So the only thing AI was used for was to... Move a ruler to the top of an image? 🧐
Woah woah woah, normie?! Okay I'll try not to take offense 😅 Someone can be non-normie and still express themselves in a straightforward manner. I think for myself quite a bit, so please don't assume otherwise just because of my writing style. I actually understand your post just fine, it's just obtuse and more difficult to understand than the typical post. Not difficult to understand because of its conceptual content - difficult to understand because of the stream of consciousness presentation. I could write like that too, I choose not to. But I think its fine if you want to write that way, it'll just find less success in this community, methinks.
People will compare unusual text to a writer in an attempt to make their ego feel as though they recognize something others don't. Other people are too stupid to understand something even a little outside a stylistic norm. Just depends on the person. Me - I don't think you're stupid, but writing in that style doesn't impress or confound me either (To be fair, almost no writing styles have ever impressed or confounded me). I've known some people IRL that are a lot like how you seem to be, they're nice fine people.
Anyways, I don't think you're getting downvoted because people don't understand you, I think it's because:
You're writing like this is your personal journal, with no concern for giving us context. ("His bike" - who is him?) Some smarter people won't mind this. But the conceptual content of your post isn't enough to be make the smart kind of person feel engaged either. I mean, it's relatable problems dude, but we all feel that way pretty much. It's a good vent but that's about it. Bringing me to...
Although the shitpost community (in my opinion, annoyingly) says that "anything goes", including specifically venting like your post is....the practical reality is it's mostly for funny images that are a bit nonsensical or trollish, not big text posts.
The vibe of your post sounds like you'll shrug off any criticism or thinking that isn't already very closely mirroring your own, and nobody wants to bother having that kind of discussion. Both parties want to be listened to.
Anyways, for what it's worth, I do think money affirmation has truth to it. Despite my lack of being impressed earlier, you can write well (I'm just not impressed by good writing, doesn't mean yours isn't good lol). Personally I think there's no harm in making enough money to have a more comfortable life when you're doing it in an artsy expressive way like writing which puts positive feelings out into society like you said. You could probably reach more people that way than by juggling, which maybe is worth considering. The money, just because its an outcome, doesn't have to be the purpose.
So yeah, no hard feelings, I only hit your original post with the downvote because I want to preserve the vibe of the community. It's like if a guy is playing a good EDM track in the middle of a bluegrass concert, its not like the music is bad, its just important to keep the concert on topic. I hope you find a cool way to keep sharing your thoughts somewhere. I don't know you well enough to say what's the best way to do that, but I'm sure your doc and your fellow weirdo have good ideas.
This content would genuinely be more at home in https://sopuli.xyz/c/aneurysmposting, and I say this with compassion and hope that you find a good place to post
Honestly I have no intrinsic problem with people doing onlyfans. It can be gross or problematic depending on how dishonestly it's approached, but I often feel like its pretty honest and harmless? I guess with her, it probably relies a lot on sad weird redditors who are in love with the simplified yet agreeable entity her comics portray her as. That's a little bit in gross territory I guess, but I'd rather she made money with porn than with putting out this "slop"-tier circlejerky junk that reduces a complex world full of discussions worth having down to:
"Me and you (Smart and right and based)
People we dislike (dumb and wrong and cringe)"
In my opinion, her comics do a lot of harm to the state of political discourse here and even more so on Reddit. It would be so much better if she would make cleverer, or funnier, or at least more critically thought-through comics (but that wouldn't be as popular). Barring that, it would be less harmful if she just did onlyfans. But also I just don't see an issue with selling that kind of stuff anyways.
Stop AI generating screenshots of AI detectors bro. I can tell this is AI because some of the pixels are making shapes that would mean I was wrong about something
It's wild that their post doesn't read like AI, is broadly more critical of AI than not, and yet because it doesn't blanket condemn AI as pure irredeemable sin - people just assume it's AI written? We've got to be careful not to let AI become this ultimate unfalsifiable scapegoat, where any time someone puts forward a line of reasoning that makes me uncomfortable, I can just say "oh wait, I know, it must be AI!" and stop thinking about it. It's so dangerous for people to have quick general purpose ways out of cognitive dissonance like that, because it prevents people from moving from wrong positions to right ones.
In addition, just because information is AI generated does not make it false. If an AI tells me the sky is blue I'm not going to start believing the sky is actually green. But the same goes for for knowledge I'm not already sure of. An AI is capable of generating good or bad arguments for a position, and if it really is just plagiarizing as you say, then whatever arguments it regurgitates would have been initially put forth by a human and worthy of your consideration by the "debate us like a real human" standard you put forth, anyways. So even if their post was generated by AI, the theoretical problem with that, according to you, is that it would be nonsense - and if that's the case, you should be able to refute the content of the argument directly rather than criticizing the source.
Yeah, even though pizzacake takes stances I generally agree with, her work has that "this comic only exists for me to express my social and political views in a way that amplifies my voice online" type of quality. This type of art usually is:
Flat or pillow shaded for simplicity, because the beauty of the image isn't relevant to its purpose, and the artist needs to produce it quickly to respond to current events
Depicts characters, even protagonists, in a mockingly exaggerated way, because this is the main form of stylization the comic must support in order for the author to make fun of strawman versions of positions they don't like (because anything beyond a strawman, regardless of position, does not fit in a digestible 4 panels)
Simple and repetitive poses with no dynamicism, often because the artist is not a very skillful artist, because they only developed the skill to make comics like this in the first place
Basically, it's visually unpleasant because the only reason this has any visual component is to make it more eye-catching compared to just text. Unlike most art, it does not need to be visually appealing, and in fact even benefits from being visually unappealing, as an art style that pisses you off a little is more likely to make you feel a vague sense of there being a problem to resolve - which the comic tells you is the issue it presents. Even advertising has to be eye-catching first, but memorable and compelling after that, because you need to take it in very quickly. Whereas this has the expectation of reading built into it, which frees it from what little need to be pleasant it may have left. The visuals are nothing more than lubricant to help the text go down.
Congress applauding this is such a great little microcosm. You know whose job it is to make sure those checks and balanced get enforced? So don't applaud like you're the audience at a show you play no part in, like you're a crowd at a concert making your support for the matter heard because its all you can do. If you like checks and balances so much, you may have to actually do your job rather than just looking brave long enough for your campaign team to clip the c-span footage into a tiktok
Yeah but he implied something not completely negative about AI so I'm pretty sure he's actually an evil moron who knows nothing, which I can say due to my vast credentials as a Lemmy user of many years
Y'all I hate Trump and do believe he raped children, but what the fuck is this post? Facebook meme type garbage. Its not funny, its not compelling, its not convincing, it doesn't even make Trump look bad. If anything this looks like the opposite of convincing because it seems like we have to cobble together images and made-up dialogue to make a point (and poorly at that). And the glowing yellow text seems like an insult to my intelligence. This 100% seems like something manufactured by a think tank and the fact that its watermarked by an X user doesn't help. Let's all not upvote or post bottom of the barrel crap just because it expresses something we agree with.
Yeah you're right, definitely gambling plays a big role. I remember the one and only time I went to a bingo hall, it was filled with people who were clearly very uneducated and unintelligent, and I say this with kindness, getting very excited about how "that one was so close!", while of course neglecting that this line of reasoning makes no actual statistical sense....it was clear the whole thing was there to take advantage of people who didn't understand how severely the odds were against them. So yeah, its definitely both things.
We were unaware of Journal policies on keeping copies of the original images