Sorcerer

Linux distros run by Leftist activists are more likely to implement Age Verification. If you look at the stats, that becomes clear: - There is a noteworthy overlap between “Non-Woke Linux Distributions” and “Linux Distributions Opposing Age Verification”. - At the same time, the majority (possibly all) of Linux distributions planning to implement Age Verification… are decidedly “Woke” (or have taken Leftist stances).

it’s actually crazy how differently straight people consume media because their brains aren’t trained to recognize queer subtext and they will look at you dead in the eyes and ask you what the hell are you talking about

FYI: collapsible batons are much cheaper than guns, don’t need licensure and are a lot less of an escalation simply to draw but are scary enough to deter and extend your reach by >1’ if not. I got my Smith & Wesson for $50. Break their legs and run! (Check legality in your area.)

Since people seem to be confused about this, here is a more complete explanation: I thought the point of the OP was that it is important (for any reason) whether or not something can be determined reliably to be a Monet painting or an AI derivative of a Monet painting - as in, if given an A/B test, can an average (or even well-trained) human tell the difference between something painted by AI and something painted by Monet? Will they misidentify a Monet as AI? Will they misidentify an AI as Monet? Etc. My point in saying Monet is a bad example (or any famous painter, I might say) is because that criteria has not historically been important even before AI, as far as I can tell. Humans seem to care whether a painting was painted by Monet, not whether anyone can tell by looking at it that it was painted by Monet (including themselves). They will happily invest in a painting if they are assured it is Monet, whether or not they themselves could ever tell the difference between that painting and a forgery, and they will be very upset if it later turns out it was not painted by Monet - even though they clearly could not tell the difference in the interim, etc. So to me, they were trying to prove one point, but accidentally proved the other point. Can most humans figure out if something is a genuine Monet or not? No. Do most humans care if something is a genuine Monet or not anyway? Absolutely. And I would argue this is a very important thing to understand about "AI art". Humans care about the origins or things - they don't just care about the things, even if they cannot themselves determine that origin definitively.