There was an episode of Elementary where they were able to find the victims password on a post-it note, because the company requires a new password every month and he didn’t want to remember a new one that often.

What a strange choice to have 6 cartoon characters and a Norse god.

It’s always quote unquote fun finding out what words are and are not in their dictionary. I got by using a bunch of nerd words, but apparently Aragorn is not allowed.

Do you remember how, in kids cartoons, you’d sometimes have the villains team up to do their evil deeds? It always seemed to unrealistic that they’d all be on the same team. And yet…

Technically, yes, but I would argue that this is worse.

An excavator saves you days of digging a single hole. An assembly line saves you from having to precisely construct a toy. A printer saves you from having to precisely duplicate a sheet of paper. All of this is monotonous and soul-destroying work that people are happy they don’t need to do.

But you still need to decide where to dig the hole. You still need to design the toy. You still need to fill in the first sheet of paper. All of the work left over is more creatively fulfilling.

We are now attempting to automate creativity.

That says more about you than about AI.

Death of the author is the idea that reader interpretation matters more than author’s intent, and it’s absolutely fair for media analysis. Sadly, too many people bundle it together with the idea that the author didn’t mean anything at all.

Heck, “the curtains were blue” applies authorial intent that there was no meaning behind the curtains. The death of the author reading shows that the curtains had a symbolic reason to be blue.

AI feels like a Lovecraftian horror to me. It’s trying to look authentic, but it’s wrong on a fundemental level. Nothing’s the right shape, nothing’s the right texture, nothing’s consistent, nothing belongs together… But somehow, nobody else has noticed what should be blatantly obvious! And when you try to point it out, you get a hivemind responding that it’s good actually, and you’re just a luddite.

But let’s assume AI stops being awful in a technical sense. It’s still awful in a moral sense.

Artists are poor. That’s a well known sentiment you see a lot and, given how many times I see commission postings, it’s pretty accurate. That artist needs to work to live, and that work is creating art.

AI is deliberately depriving these artists of work in order to give the AI’s owner a quick, low quality substitute. In some cases, it will copy an artist’s style, so you’re deliberately targetting a specific artist because they’re good at their job. And it’s using the artist’s work in order to replace them.

There was a time when King Charles tried to overturn parliament way back in the 1600s. I forget what happened next, but I’m pretty sure it was all very civil.

See, this is why all cops are bastards. Because when you stop being a bastard, you lose your job.

Think of it as “worth the price”. Canadian healthcare is definitely worth the price, given that the price is zero. American prices are so high that nothing could be worth that, so it’s not even worth the price of an ambulance. Oh, yeah, they charge for the ambulance ride.

Improvisation is a brilliant skill in something where you can just keep going if something goes wrong. Attention to detail is a brilliant skill in something where something going wrong will get someone killed. The example that comes to mind is a stage hand vs a stage hand where pyrotechnics are involved.

Nah, that’s not why. A billionaire can give millions away without any impact on their life.

There are two paths to becoming a billionaire. The first is to hit the Goldilocks zone of a good product with mass appeal, good distribution and to have significant ownership of it. The second is to already BE rich. Most billionaires are the second one.