FaceDeer

May those weapons work as well for China as they have for Russia.

You'd think they'd have learned from history about this. You need crematoria when doing a genocide.

Yeah. And in Empire Strikes Back the Rebels got rolled over as soon as the Imperial ground forces reached their base, the whole strategy of the battle of Hoth was to delay them for as long as possible so that everything and everyone possible could be evacuated. They'd started evacuating the moment they knew they'd been spotted. Same with Bespin, the strategy was always "run the fuck away" when Imperial forces showed up.

The only real loss we saw for Stormtroopers was Endor, and that was a bit of a special case. They were up against Ewoks, on their native ground, after the Ewoks had been radicalized by their god's direct divine instruction and coordinated by an elite Rebel strike team. Doesn't matter if you're the Emperor's best troops, you're going to struggle against something like that. Endor is a hellworld and Ewoks are murder-bears.

This changes the scenario significantly, though.

Your original version had original series Stormtroopers, who are known to be crack shots and elites among the Empire's forces. There's a common misconception that they're bad aims, because in the first movie they were ordered to let Leia escape. They were showing tremendous marksmanship and discipline to miss all those shots while looking like they were trying to hit and allowing many of them to get killed in the process.

Your new version has a First Order trooper. The First Order is some kind of weird fever dream that never really existed and whose capabilities varied wildly from movie to movie as the different writers and directors made up contradictory shit without any plan or consistency. So who knows.

In both versions, the Starfleet security officer's famous flimsiness should be noted in the context we see it in - constantly encountering unique and/or wildly advanced threats. Little wonder so many of them died, they had no idea what they were up against.

Alright, here's what's probably my most diverse and "fun" playlist: Funny How Science Works. It's a collection of songs about science and technology. Each song often starts out technical and educational and then veers off into insanity. For example Tectonic Truth, which is about plate tectonics, and Along the Lines of Blaschko, which is about Blaschko lines, a pattern of cell differentiation found in females but not in males as a result of X-chromosome inactivation (I think this is probably the only song in existence about Blaschko's lines). Others are a bit less deranged, for example Million Player Co-Op is just about how awesome ants are. And speaking of ants, Little Pilot is about Dicrocoelium dendriticum, the liver lancet fluke, a parasitic flatworm that uses ants as an intermediate host.

Criterion Three is about how the IAU reclassified Pluto as a dwarf planet in 2006 and in particular it's about how much of a hypocrite S. Alan Stern was about it. This is perhaps one of the pettiest and most specific diss tracks I'm aware of. Speaking of diss tracks, The Pro-K is sung by a prokaryotic bacterium dissing eukaryotes for how unreasonably complicated our cellular structure is.

If you're leaning anti-AI then you might enjoy my AI Apocalypse playlist, which is a bunch of songs along the general theme of AIs taking over the world. I'm not personally concerned about the stereotypical Skynet bombs-and-Terminators scenario, that's Hollywood, but I do have some concern about the emergence of a Super-Persuader AI that's better at convincing people to do stuff than humans are. So a number of the songs are along those lines.

Many of the songs in these playlists are ones where I wrote pages of detailed prompts and tinkered with the results, since they involve personal philosophies and technical scientific subjects that I wanted to make sure were right. Here's an example of a song that was generated with just a simple prompt to see what would come out; Insert Romance Here, which I generated by simply telling the AI "generate the most absolutely generic possible romantic song."

Here's a playlist of songs that's entirely about the RS-232 standard, a standard introduced in 1960 for serial transmission of data.

A lot of the songs in these lists have probably only been listened to by me, nobody else has ever heard them. It's a little annoying that Producer.ai, the service I used to generate all of these, doesn't support attaching an "author's note" to each song; many of these only really make any sense with a little bit of context about what was in my head when I generated them. But hopefully most of the ones I've made public are self-explanatory to some degree.

It's a difficult question to answer, "why do you like the things that you like?"

There is surprise that can be had at the generation phase. Sometimes I've got a particular detailed thing in mind that I'd like to hear about, I can end up writing pages of prompts, hand-tweaking the lyrics extensively, and regenerating bits until it's just right. Other times I'll throw out a very general vibe and just see what the AI comes up with. Some of my favourites are songs that definitely surprised me.

I'm actually not very familiar with the specific ways of describing the sound of different styles of songs - pop-rock, folk ballad, driving bass lines, all those sorts of descriptive terms are lost on me. So I usually let the AI come up with something for that based on a more general vibe, like I tell it a song should be "upbeat" and "informative" and it'll come up with something. I get to hear a lot of variety that way.

Would you like me to link specific examples? Honestly I was expecting more of an "AI sucks and you suck" kind of response but I guess there's enough responses to this post that I haven't been noticed in among them all, so I could show you a playlist or a few specific tracks that show the kind of music that I enjoy that I don't think I'd have ever been able to find in significant quantities from "traditional" music sources.

I care a fair bit about music, but in a way that's likely very unpopular around these parts.

I'm a fan of AI-generated music. I've got about 600 songs I've generated over the years and almost all of them are about things and are in styles that I personally find relevant to my interests and life.

Some of your other questions are rendered moot by this. There's no albums or artists for these songs. I've loosely grouped them into a few giant playlists based on the sort of mood they fit. I listen to them while doing things like walking my dog. I don't use particularly fancy earbuds or other hardware, though I made sure to get decent speakers for my computer for while I work on them to make sure they're high quality at their source.

Since most of the songs are personally meaningful to me, if only because they scratched a very particular itch I was having the day I generated them, I care about them. I don't expect most of them would be of interest to other folk. I mostly don't share them since they're for me and anyone else can easily generate their own custom stuff, though I've made some public when they've struck me as particularly amusing or interesting.

I have presupposed nothing.

You wrote:

The lung capacity of smokers is deficient, yes? Is the mere fact offensive? Should we just not talk about how someone struggling to breathe as they walk up stairs is the direct result of their smoking?

By using this analogy for the "brain rot" you claim comes from AI use, you are presupposing that it actually happens. You're putting as much confidence in that as there is in the well-established but completely unrelated effect of smoking on lung capacity.

Ultimately, what this whole exchange boils down to:

OP: How do I tell people I don't use AI without insulting them?

You: Tell them I think they're stupid.

How useful.

It's not a random fallacy, it's the one you're engaging in. Look it up. Your analogy presupposes an answer to the question that is actually at hand. It's the classic "have you stopped beating your wife" situation.

This is literally begging the question.

What would the inoffensive way of phrasing it be?

...and then you proceed to spend the next two paragraphs continuing to rant about how mentally deficient you think AI users are.

Not that, for starters.

They've lost so much of their brains to AI, that even valid criticism of AI feel like personal insults to them.

More likely they feel insulted by people saying how "brain-rotted" they are.