aquariums would get sooo much more money if they stopped making all the plushies just sharks and seals and turtles. you can do better. show me the sturgeon. the coelacanth. the trout
(Why yes, I already have a pair of rainbow sneaks. But these are rainbow Unicorno sneaks!)
Me: “Is this too twee?”
Hubby: “It’s cute.”
Me: “But is it TOO twee?”
Hubby: “No such thing as too cute.”
Me: *clicks order*
They also come with the below patterns/styles, and while I do love a canvas hi-top, rainbow pride Unicornos are just that much better.
Holy shit where can I get these? How expensive are they??
They were on Skechers website under “Exclusives.” Looks like the slip-ons and hi-tops are still available, the rainbow sneakers are no longer listed. They were $75 or $80 retail I think.
Sorry babes but as someone who lived lug around 500 cds they can die. To me lps are at least pretty and pretentious like a fine wine. Cds have no point
the point is cds are sexy as hell. sorry you dont know what sex is.
The real point is that you OWN a CD. You do NOT own anything digital you purchase.
Google Play stole hundreds of dollars worth of music I paid them for from me by forcing me to upload it to YouTube Music (or lose it entirely) which is behind a subscription paywall, requiring me now to pay more money every month if I want to listen to MY music I PAID for without constant advertising.
You do not own anything digitally purchased. It can be taken back from you at any time and it is fully legal for big corporations to do so for some reason.
CDs can’t be taken from you unless they come into your house or car in person to physically pry them out of your cold dead hands.
That’s why the resurgence. As funny as that person’s reply to you was, it’s not in fact because they look sexy. It’s because you actually own them.
Look- CDs are your friend. CD-ROMs and CD drives with the capacity to burn? Are your friends with benefits.
in general i would say that “it’s not fun if they’re totally unrecognisable” is my fandom thesis. like the point of fanfic etc is putting your favourite little guys in situations. where’s the appeal if they’ve been through so many fanon spin cycles that they’re barely even your guys anymore
I’m seeing some frustration over fandom creatives expressing anger or distress over people feeding their work into ChatGPT. I’m not responding to OP directly because I don’t want to derail their post (their intent was to provide perspective on how these models actually work, and reduce undue panic, which is all coming from a good place!), but reassurances that the addition of our work will have a negligible impact on the model (which is true at this point) does kind of miss the point? Speaking for myself, my distress is less about the practical ramifications of feeding my fic into ChatGPT, and more about the principle of someone taking my work and deliberately adding it to the dataset.
Like, I fully realize that my work is a drop in the bucket of ChatGPT’s several-billion-token training set! It will not make a demonstrable practical difference in the output of the model! That doesn’t change the fact that I do not want my work to be part of the set of data that the ChatGPT devs use for training.
Now, will one fic make a demonstrable difference in the output of the model? No! But as the person who spent a year and a handful of months laboring over my fic, it makes a difference to me whether my fic, specifically, is being used in the dataset. If authors are allowed to have a problem with the ChatGPT devs for scraping millions of fics without permission, they’re also allowed to have a problem with folks handing their individual fics over via the chat interface.
I do want to add that if you’ve done this to a fic, please don’t take this as me being upset with you personally! Folks are still learning new information and puzzling out what “good” vs. “bad” use is, from an ethical standpoint. (Heck, my own perspective on this is deeply based on my own subjective feelings!) And we certainly shouldn’t act like one person feeding a fic into ChatGPT has the same practical negative impact, on a broad societal scale, as a team using a web crawler to scrape five billion pieces of artwork for Stable Diffusion.
The point is that fundamentally, an ethical dataset should be obtained with the consent of those providing the data. Just because it’s normalized for our data to be scraped without consent doesn’t make it ethical, and this is why ChatGPT gives users the option to not share data— there is actually a standardized way (robots.txt) for website servers to set policies for how bots/crawlers can interact with them, for exactly this reason— and I think fandom artists and authors are well within their rights to express a desire for opting out to be the socially-respected default within the fandom community.
“The point is that fundamentally, an ethical dataset should be obtained with the consent of those providing the data.”
It makes little difference to the AI if my writing is inserted into its model; but it makes a difference to me the same way it made a difference back in the Supernatural fandom when someone took my fic and inserted it into an anthology of SPN fic and sold that anthology without my permission. That is a misuse of my intentions as a writer.
