They always do that. They're constantly measuring communications and responses to news events. They catalog them and reuse them later. Which is why so many elements of Floyd match Garner.
The petty crime possibly outside of local police jurisdiction. "I can't breath." The use of 'illegal holds' that turn out to be actually documented procedures.
The difference between the two was the immediate involvement of the FBI in the Floyd case, as opposed to 3 to 4 months after in the Garner case. Which was after the New York grand jury concluded that no charges should be brought against the officers. In Garner the local agents in NY wanted to empanel a federal Grand Jury but were overruled by DOJ and the case was halted.
Public school turns citizens into Manchurian Candidates. The news knows what to say to push people one direction or another. The fix for Floyd was in. Possibly before he even went to Cup Foods that day.
This bitch.
As if she doesn't look at polling data on the daily that breaks the country down, fucking literally, into those exact demographic buckets.
And her advisors tell her: "Oh, great speech, representative! That line about `we are one' really did well with the ex-convict and border-jumper demos."
on the complex interactions of neurons
You keep saying things that show you don't really understand what is happening.
but you are just making shit up to win arguments.
I'm not trying to win anything. That's what you're doing. And you're doing a very bad job of it. You keep repeating yourself and ignoring the inconvenient parts of my argument.
Every day we make fun of Neo-Marxist fuckheads for making up their own facts, and here you are doing it to win an internet slap fight.
Get off the cross. I disagree with you. Learn to cope. Instead of inventing retarded narratives to soothe yourself just give up. There is nothing to win here, sport, and disagreement is acceptable. Look at how hard you strain to simply avoid this obvious detente.
You're either not serious or you are unwell. Either way I don't plan to continue provoking your absurd diatribes.
"lol; they are just Xerox machines!' isn't one.
That's a disingenuous reduction of the argument I posed to you. Well, makes you look like the winner, I guess.
Do you think God fails to get what he wants?
Yes. Do you think God wanted Satan to be evil? If so, why? Do you believe you actually know what God "wants?"
Did God want Eve to eat that apple? If so, why?
Does God want there to be sin in the world? If so, why?
This wasn't nearly as good of a point as you thought it was.
but we don't worship the same God
Oh no. I'm not in your made up club. What of it?
I'd say that what you worship isn't much of a god at all in that case.
Ah, so God wants you to judge my worship, and to denigrate me for it? Yea, you're right, we don't worship the same God then.
Read the story of Job. Carefully. Think that through. "Have I been tricked by an evil angel?" It's more likely that you have than you have not. It reminds me of the villagers in that story, they blamed Job for what had happened to him, and assumed God was punishing him for some unknown reason. Don't you ever think about those people and cry?
What do you actually worship? Earthly power? Or the Holy Spirit?
Further, I think you know what the actual definition is, and you are arguing in bad faith.
Really?
If a human artist looks at a drawing or an image, then makes a copy of it by hand, it is substantially different.
Transformative is the standard. And it can be adjudicated. Pure copies by hand are called forgeries and are not legal to sell. I don't know why you think a hand copy is immediately substantially transformative when there's centuries of case law saying precisely the opposite and offering real tests to be used in making the determination.
You also can't copyright an artistic school or style.
If I can recognize the style then it's obvious you copied it.
So, you are conflating the term "duplicate" with the term "copy".
No, you are, in an effort to argue in bad faith. The tool makes copies. Sometimes those copies are so bad they actually do violate copyright. That they can be transformative does not relieve them of being copies. This is obvious.
Your previous example seemed to rely on the fact you could combine a known character with octopus parts and call that a "new work." The point being, even copyright law, with all it's exceptions, would call this a violation. You can't draw Iron Man with squid legs and call it a new character.
That doesn't mean they are a Xerox machine.
Effectively they are. So are humans. The difference is humans are additionally capable of creating entirely new things. These toys cannot. They will not. There is no upgrade to make them capable of it. There is no obvious technological path from the current implementation to a new one which is equally capable.
This thing can only copy. To get back on point your 30 year timeline is bogus. If you understand this technology so well then you should see this clearly.
sell cloaks and buy swords.
Then, like, right after that, what does he say about living by the sword?
"they do not bear the sword for nothing"
That's Paul for you. I wonder why he, of all people, was trying to establish earthly authority of God? Which is something Jesus definitely didn't strain to talk about a lot.
The Bible lists a positive avalanche of God's enemies
Old Testament or New Testament? Did Jesus die for nothing?
like he's unaware of who is saved and who is not
You ever read the parable of the Lost Sheep? Does it sound like Jesus wants you to feel permanently lost? I can't believe he wants only some souls to go to Heaven.
The NN does its best to draw a squid.
That's not a serious description and demonstrates a poor grasp on the underlying technology. It's guided recursive perturbation of noise. Until that noise looks enough like something it's seen before to become classified as the same.
Anyone else would call this copying with a little bit of randomness added in. You should really dig a little deeper here.
Anyways try the exclusive case. Have it draw something that has never been classified before. You can look around for items of antiquity or lost cultures and see how it fares. Since it can't do these things it obviously only can do things it has seen and have been classified. So it can only reproduce what it has been trained on. This is obvious.
which will combine their ability to satisfy both sets of criteria at the same time.
Wow, so it combined two copies into one thing? That's still copying.
It is vaguely impressive that preturbative systems are effective at quickly finding approximate solutions. Which is why "satisfying both sets of criteria" means you get 7 fingered hands and other oddities expressed in the image. Add more criteria for more fun.
You're really just playing Monte Carlo on a stolen deck of classifications. To be fair, Google did pay a bunch of africans $2/day to tag the images, so there is some originality in the database, but very little.
that image has never been created before.
Fortunately that's now how copyright works or how copying is defined in the eyes of the law.
that we're not allowed to enact earthly justice, that we're not allowed to have our own governments, our own laws, punish criminals, that we must allow our enemies to run roughshod over us
You're twisting my words. And you know it. You write all of this, to what, drown me in your piety, and then you do this to me?
I told you that the death penalty without salvation of that sinner first is against God, which it clearly is, I didn't tell you punishment of criminals is wrong or shouldn't be done. You've invented this lie to serve yourself.
I told you that pretending your government is ordained by God is against God, which it clearly is, I didn't tell you that having a government to maintain order is wrong or shouldn't be done. You've again invented this lie to serve yourself.
Do not forget that Satan quotes scripture.
He also likes to twist words and is eager to confuse and beguile with needless complexity.
search engines fucking suck now
On purpose. The same companies that own this technology own search engines. They broke the algorithm and destroyed result quality on purpose. Their only metric now is "time spent on Google." They don't care about the rest anymore.
and I'm not paying hundreds of dollars and waiting several weeks to commission anything.
For your.. rpg character icon? Is that like a huge market or something?
it's another method of creating a vision you have in your head.
Except when it's a literal copy of something that previously existed. Tools actually allow you to express anything. These models, by virtue of how they're built, can't.
and the entire idea that reality wasn't like that will be erased
Except for all the primary and secondary evidence that runs counter to it. As if forgeries are a new problem.
Or do you mean literally erased. Which you'd have to do because people aren't as simple as you portray them to be. In which case the hallucinations of "AI" don't matter, it's just the erasure of history. Why is why that's the centerpiece of Orwell's 1984.
In 30 years, everyone will believe
You're confusing what we have now as AI. You have a weak grasp on the technology if you think a 30 year timeline is realistic to get from here to there. You've been beguiled and stultified by bad technology and have fallen into this midwit's trap. You mispredict the future badly and entirely at your own peril.
This is why the spend billions on the technology. Is so that you self select yourself out of a job and cede ground to them. They've won your slavery without even a fight.
(but not to forgive God's enemies)
There's only one. Satan. Everyone else can be forgiven.
the left hand kingdom of God, which are earthly authorities/government
Protestant nonsense. They saw the problems with the Church, then created their own, then invented this theological turd to justify their failure.
to execute murderers
To execute the unredeemed is a failure.
and tells us to love our neighbors
"If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?"
He also tells you to love your enemies. And to pray for them. Otherwise you might be treading up against the first commandment.
If a woman feels unsafe, a real man backs off.
Outside of a private romantic context this is nonsense. You're an elected representative. Give up the job if you can't handle pressure. You can literally just call your governor and quit.
Hold the line.
You're in a CVS, retard.
"Listen. If I can't use food dyes, then people won't eat my product, because it's the lowest quality potato I could find fried in the worst quality oil I could find. It looks and smells like a nightmare before we dress it with this shit."
and created the brighter colors people “wanted” in their food.
Meanwhile he'll tell you cigarette companies are super bad because they're modified to make them more appealing and addictive.
Which, from someone who completely removed processed foods from their diet, everything on that table looks exceptionally gross to me precisely because it's so unnaturally colored. That table is a dystopian masterpiece of our fucked up food system.
That's why the hebrew language is so important to them and translations have never been that good.
It does allow them to live in their own bubble with their world view completely unchallenged and it prevents a fair portion of their citizens from seeing anything outside the walls.
A good technique is to use outside operatives. Just in case they get caught everyone can have plausible deniability.