3DBeerGoggles
@3dbeergoggles.bsky.social
Nerd in Canada that fixes Electronics
Exhibit #10578349 on my evidence board for "Tesla stans are impressed by FSD because they suck at driving"
December 16, 2025 at 6:20 AM
Exhibit #10578349 on my evidence board for "Tesla stans are impressed by FSD because they suck at driving"
Oh man, I just realized what you said reminds me of:
December 16, 2025 at 3:08 AM
Oh man, I just realized what you said reminds me of:
At this point it's like they're just all stoking the ship's engines with cash to burn all hoping they'll be able to step off before they hit the iceberg.
December 16, 2025 at 2:02 AM
At this point it's like they're just all stoking the ship's engines with cash to burn all hoping they'll be able to step off before they hit the iceberg.
Exactly. OpenAI has like $1T in contract spend spending right now on a company that grossed like $15B... and there's no reason to believe that any of this will actually deliver. They could spend $2T and still be struggling to find a profitable model that doesn't have to be forced on people.
December 16, 2025 at 2:01 AM
Exactly. OpenAI has like $1T in contract spend spending right now on a company that grossed like $15B... and there's no reason to believe that any of this will actually deliver. They could spend $2T and still be struggling to find a profitable model that doesn't have to be forced on people.
That's the really fucked up part: OpenAI is really obviously a company whose entire future is a big fat "How soon and how bad does it fall?" but in the mean time they're doing their level best to absolutely fuck anyone with a more stable business.
December 15, 2025 at 11:34 PM
That's the really fucked up part: OpenAI is really obviously a company whose entire future is a big fat "How soon and how bad does it fall?" but in the mean time they're doing their level best to absolutely fuck anyone with a more stable business.
Isn't it a great that a company that has literally zero clear path to being profitable still somehow has so much money he can intentionally hobble his competitors in blatant anticompetitive behavior?
December 15, 2025 at 11:32 PM
Isn't it a great that a company that has literally zero clear path to being profitable still somehow has so much money he can intentionally hobble his competitors in blatant anticompetitive behavior?
D)runk
E)?
I)?
Let's workshop this :D
E)?
I)?
Let's workshop this :D
December 15, 2025 at 11:30 PM
D)runk
E)?
I)?
Let's workshop this :D
E)?
I)?
Let's workshop this :D
That paragraph reads like someone that didn't even live through that era trying to describe it but only reading what people said after 16 years of the GWOT.
December 14, 2025 at 4:56 AM
That paragraph reads like someone that didn't even live through that era trying to describe it but only reading what people said after 16 years of the GWOT.
These people cannot feel shame because they have no principles, no morals.
December 11, 2025 at 10:26 PM
These people cannot feel shame because they have no principles, no morals.
Come and See is one I recommend seeing at least once, if only to have a very unique perspective on WW2 that is often missing from normal war movies.
December 11, 2025 at 9:13 AM
Come and See is one I recommend seeing at least once, if only to have a very unique perspective on WW2 that is often missing from normal war movies.
Well, the people that worry about Roko's Basilisk pretty much reinvented Calvinism
November 26, 2025 at 1:30 AM
Well, the people that worry about Roko's Basilisk pretty much reinvented Calvinism
Cut to a lemming-esque waterfall of cars launching into Hudson's Bay
November 20, 2025 at 9:18 PM
Cut to a lemming-esque waterfall of cars launching into Hudson's Bay
AI "art" does not create, it imitates and it regurgitates.
Humans made art before art existed, but a diffusion model could not make art without being shown millions of examples of art first.
Anyways, as much fun as it is reading "AI art copium 101", it's getting a bit tedious so I'm going now.
Humans made art before art existed, but a diffusion model could not make art without being shown millions of examples of art first.
Anyways, as much fun as it is reading "AI art copium 101", it's getting a bit tedious so I'm going now.
November 15, 2025 at 6:29 AM
AI "art" does not create, it imitates and it regurgitates.
Humans made art before art existed, but a diffusion model could not make art without being shown millions of examples of art first.
Anyways, as much fun as it is reading "AI art copium 101", it's getting a bit tedious so I'm going now.
Humans made art before art existed, but a diffusion model could not make art without being shown millions of examples of art first.
Anyways, as much fun as it is reading "AI art copium 101", it's getting a bit tedious so I'm going now.
But I like how you've now pivoted between the extremes of "AI is real cognition for making art" and "AI isn't making art, it's actually the guy punching "Cute girl 4K sunset cyberpunk neon art motorcycle posing High Quality Portrait" into stable diffusion that's the artist.
November 15, 2025 at 6:27 AM
But I like how you've now pivoted between the extremes of "AI is real cognition for making art" and "AI isn't making art, it's actually the guy punching "Cute girl 4K sunset cyberpunk neon art motorcycle posing High Quality Portrait" into stable diffusion that's the artist.
...and with the reliability of the sun in the East, we're back to "Actually, cribbing off of millions of images to statistically generate something is exactly like using a paintbrush"
Yeah sure, and if I screenshot the results from a google query I'm an artist.
Yeah sure, and if I screenshot the results from a google query I'm an artist.
November 15, 2025 at 6:23 AM
...and with the reliability of the sun in the East, we're back to "Actually, cribbing off of millions of images to statistically generate something is exactly like using a paintbrush"
Yeah sure, and if I screenshot the results from a google query I'm an artist.
Yeah sure, and if I screenshot the results from a google query I'm an artist.
Clearly this conversation is wasting both of our time, because you want to conflate "it makes the product" with being the same a person making something.
Wolfram alpha is not a mathematician, Excel isn't an accountant, and Stable Diffusion isn't an artist.
Wolfram alpha is not a mathematician, Excel isn't an accountant, and Stable Diffusion isn't an artist.
November 15, 2025 at 6:19 AM
Clearly this conversation is wasting both of our time, because you want to conflate "it makes the product" with being the same a person making something.
Wolfram alpha is not a mathematician, Excel isn't an accountant, and Stable Diffusion isn't an artist.
Wolfram alpha is not a mathematician, Excel isn't an accountant, and Stable Diffusion isn't an artist.
...and again, you conflate "output" with art.
A diffusion model doesn't have intent, it has statistical models. It doesn't have opinions, intents, preferences, or a personal style.
Again, the comparison is reductionist to the point of making art itself worthless, which is a theme for AI techbros.
A diffusion model doesn't have intent, it has statistical models. It doesn't have opinions, intents, preferences, or a personal style.
Again, the comparison is reductionist to the point of making art itself worthless, which is a theme for AI techbros.
November 15, 2025 at 6:18 AM
...and again, you conflate "output" with art.
A diffusion model doesn't have intent, it has statistical models. It doesn't have opinions, intents, preferences, or a personal style.
Again, the comparison is reductionist to the point of making art itself worthless, which is a theme for AI techbros.
A diffusion model doesn't have intent, it has statistical models. It doesn't have opinions, intents, preferences, or a personal style.
Again, the comparison is reductionist to the point of making art itself worthless, which is a theme for AI techbros.
My critique was responding to the notion that CURRENT AI systems and architecture were at all comparable to an actual thinking being rather than what they are: a collection of statistical models
Saying "well some day we might emulate a brain" wouldn't retroactively make Stable Diffusion a person
Saying "well some day we might emulate a brain" wouldn't retroactively make Stable Diffusion a person
November 15, 2025 at 6:07 AM
My critique was responding to the notion that CURRENT AI systems and architecture were at all comparable to an actual thinking being rather than what they are: a collection of statistical models
Saying "well some day we might emulate a brain" wouldn't retroactively make Stable Diffusion a person
Saying "well some day we might emulate a brain" wouldn't retroactively make Stable Diffusion a person
I'm talking about reality, today, not speculative what-ifs about some day building a 1:1 neuronal model of an actual thinking creature and getting it to make art for me.
November 15, 2025 at 6:05 AM
I'm talking about reality, today, not speculative what-ifs about some day building a 1:1 neuronal model of an actual thinking creature and getting it to make art for me.
1) You linked a locked article, and the article I could find about it didn't mention emulation
2) This still has fuck all to do with GENERATIVE AI.
I didn't say "it's literally impossible to ever emulate neurons" I said it's not how genAI works.
Comparing the current state of GenAI to this is BS
2) This still has fuck all to do with GENERATIVE AI.
I didn't say "it's literally impossible to ever emulate neurons" I said it's not how genAI works.
Comparing the current state of GenAI to this is BS
November 15, 2025 at 5:59 AM
1) You linked a locked article, and the article I could find about it didn't mention emulation
2) This still has fuck all to do with GENERATIVE AI.
I didn't say "it's literally impossible to ever emulate neurons" I said it's not how genAI works.
Comparing the current state of GenAI to this is BS
2) This still has fuck all to do with GENERATIVE AI.
I didn't say "it's literally impossible to ever emulate neurons" I said it's not how genAI works.
Comparing the current state of GenAI to this is BS
Actually, on that topic - with that whole "looks like an answer, but the source doesn't back it up" topic, are you perchance just having an AI write these responses for you?
November 15, 2025 at 5:54 AM
Actually, on that topic - with that whole "looks like an answer, but the source doesn't back it up" topic, are you perchance just having an AI write these responses for you?
Also, and I can't believe I have to point this out:
1) It's a map, not an emulator.
2) Fruit flies don't have opinions about art.
That you thought this proves anything in the topic at hand feels more like you're just throwing anything that is vaguely proof-shaped at the screen.
1) It's a map, not an emulator.
2) Fruit flies don't have opinions about art.
That you thought this proves anything in the topic at hand feels more like you're just throwing anything that is vaguely proof-shaped at the screen.
November 15, 2025 at 5:48 AM
Also, and I can't believe I have to point this out:
1) It's a map, not an emulator.
2) Fruit flies don't have opinions about art.
That you thought this proves anything in the topic at hand feels more like you're just throwing anything that is vaguely proof-shaped at the screen.
1) It's a map, not an emulator.
2) Fruit flies don't have opinions about art.
That you thought this proves anything in the topic at hand feels more like you're just throwing anything that is vaguely proof-shaped at the screen.
No, what's "overly simple" is conflating something like diffusion models with the complexity of a biological brain.
And conflating leading-edge research into modelling the least complex biological systems with current GenAI ranges between dishonest and delusional.
And conflating leading-edge research into modelling the least complex biological systems with current GenAI ranges between dishonest and delusional.
November 15, 2025 at 5:40 AM
No, what's "overly simple" is conflating something like diffusion models with the complexity of a biological brain.
And conflating leading-edge research into modelling the least complex biological systems with current GenAI ranges between dishonest and delusional.
And conflating leading-edge research into modelling the least complex biological systems with current GenAI ranges between dishonest and delusional.
"Guy that works for Google overstating parallels between social cohesion and AI models" engaging in vague handwaving and sophistry strains that "may" in the headline to the breaking point.
Neither this nor Eliza-effect hallucinations mean genAI has actual opinions.
Neither this nor Eliza-effect hallucinations mean genAI has actual opinions.
November 15, 2025 at 2:24 AM
"Guy that works for Google overstating parallels between social cohesion and AI models" engaging in vague handwaving and sophistry strains that "may" in the headline to the breaking point.
Neither this nor Eliza-effect hallucinations mean genAI has actual opinions.
Neither this nor Eliza-effect hallucinations mean genAI has actual opinions.