Dude complaining about a dude complaining about apple being proprietary in 2024, when apple has built their entire business from day one by being the most draconian closed loop proprietary hardware/software model since personal computers were invented…

You just made the same argument, but in an aggressively dumb way.

No, it’s not socially acceptable. Yes, I wish it were.

Like, does this mean you are afraid of other people you don’t know judging you, or that you or your friends find it socially unacceptable?

Either way that seems to be more of an individual problem rather than a social one. I am physically affectionate with my friends and have never been confronted about it by a member of the public , not that I would really care if I were. People be dumb, I’m not going to let someone else’s projected homophobia dictate my friendship.

Reading comprehension is still hard for you? My argument was about Cathartic theory, which includes several emotions including sexual urges… It is a theory from freud, of course it covers sexual urges.

You and the other guy just have no idea what you’re talking about. How about providing any kind of source instead of talking out of your ass?

But I do recognize a logical fallacy when I see one.

I doubt that, so far your argument has been based on the anecdotal fallacy mixed with a bit of the appeal to authority fallacy.

The point is you can reduce anything to its origin.

Okay, but how does the modern version of cathartic theory differ from what freud postulated?

I agree you can’t reduce things based on its original alone , which is why I included a scientific source as evidence…

Lol, you were the one who first dismissed evidence because it was 20 years old…

Let’s see here, listen to my therapist who has decades of real experience or a study from over 20 years ago?

Your therapist is still utilizing Freudian psychoanalysis?

Well, if age is a factor in your opinion about the validity of the care you receive, I have some bad news for you…

understand that the theory supposedly applies to other areas as well, but as you so helpfully pointed out: the theory doesn’t seem to hold up.

My original claim was that cathartic theory in and of itself is not founded on evidence based research.

but at the same time, the theory is totally correct! (when it’s convenient to you, that is)

When did I claim it was ever correct?

I think you are misconstruing my original claim with the claims made by the cathartic theory itself.

I don’t claim that cathartic theory is beneficial in any way, you are the one claiming that Cathartic theory is correct for sexual aggression, but not for violence.

Do you have a source that claims cathartic theory is beneficial for satiation deviant sexual impulses?

then the claim of a link between sexuality and aggression is also without support, until you provide a source for that claim.

You are wanting me to provide an evidence based claim between the two when I’ve already said the overarching theory is not based on evidence?

The primary principle to establish is the theory of cathartic relief, not wether it works for one emotion or the other. You have not provided any evidence to support that claim, I have provided evidence that disputes it.

but is not relevant to the topic at hand.

The belief that indulging in AI created child porn relieves the sexual deviant behaviour of being attracted to actual minors utilizes the cathartic theory. The cathartic theory is typically understood to relate to an array of emotions, not just anger. "Further, the catharsis hypothesis maintains that aggressive or sexual urges are relieved by “releasing” aggressive or sexual energy, usually through action or fantasy. "

follows the same patterns as aggression. that’s a pretty big claim! i’d like to see a source that supports that claim.

That’s not a claim I make, it’s a claim that cathartic theory states. As I said the cathartic hypothesis is a byproduct of Freudian psychology, which has largely been debunked.

Your issue is with the theory in and of itself, which my claim is already stating to be problematic.

but is also entirely off-topic…

No, you are just conflating colloquial understanding of catharsis with the psychological theory.

Lol, my source is about the cathartic hypothesis. So your theory is that it doesn’t work with anger, but does work for sexual deviancy?

Do you have a source that supports that?

Catharsis theory predicts that venting anger should get rid of it and should therefore reduce subsequent aggression. The present findings, as well as previous findings, directly contradict catharsis theory (e.g., Bushman et al., 1999; Geen & Quanty, 1977). For reduc- ing anger and aggression, the worst possible advice to give people is to tell them to imagine their provocateur’s face on a pillow or punching bag as they wallop it, yet this is precisely what many pop psychologists advise people to do. If followed, such advice will only make people angrier and more aggressive.

Source

But there’s a lot more studies who have essentially said the same thing. The cathartic hypothesis is mainly a byproduct of the Freudian era of psychology, where hypothesis mainly just sounded good to someone on too much cocaine.

Do you have a source of studies showing the opposite?

Currently even if they used voice clips to train a model on her voice it wouldn’t be illegal.

I think that’s currently the point of contention…

That isn’t currently the case, since they say they used an other actress that sounds like her anyways.

That’s what they’re claiming, but it’s not like open AI doesn’t have a pretty well documented history of lying.

No! Just like she doesn’t deserve to own the four chord progressions that make up her songs.

There’s a difference between common chord progressions and plagiarizing someone’s voice and performance. You are the only person conflating the two.

This is why none of this is copyrightable. There are two many people that have similar voices

I think their intent is pretty clear. They didn’t want a similar voice, they wanted her voice. After failing at getting her consent, they proceeded anyways.

and too many songs that use similar chord progressions.

There’s actual precedent on how similar songs can be to each other without giving credit. Simple chord progressions aren’t copyrightable, but how those chord progressions are performed are.

Your fantasy where this empowers small time artists is just that, a fantasy.

Lol, if they are able to plagiarize art from millionaires, what’s the chance there’s going to be any kind of protections for small artist?

If we push and they come out with new laws that make these things copyrightable, you just end up with corporations owning all of it.

We don’t have to come out with laws banning chord progressions, that’s just a strawman argument you erected yourself. We just need to apply the laws we currently have to AI companies. If Sony had tried to get her to dress like black widow and do a commercial and she refused. And if they then proceeded to hire an actress who looked like her, dressed the actress in a black skin tight suit, and gave her a red wig… We’d be dealing with a hefty lawsuit, even if they claimed it wasn’t supposed to be SJ.

Well that, and the idea of cathartic relief is increasingly being dispelled. Behaviour once thought to act as a pressure relief for harmful impulsive behaviour is more than likely just a pattern of escalation.

I think they’re both pretty similar. The main difference being that one is being played from a shitty phone speaker and recorded by a camera and the other is coming from studio quality audio.

Not really an admition of guilt like the article makes it seem.

You don’t need an admission of guilt to lose in court. The fact that they pursued her permission up until 2 days before the release, even after being assured the client did not wish for them to utilize her voice, is pretty damning.

I don’t think scar jo deserves to own the whole spectrum her voice belongs to just because she voiced an AI in one movie.

What’s the difference between this and an AI releasing a Taylor Swift album? Does Taylor Swift deserve to own a whole spectrum of voice?

Voice acting is still an art, and artists deserve to be paid for their contributions. If she has performed an awfully in Her, would they still want to mimic her voice? If Her hadn’t been made, would they have come up with the voice and personality out of the blue?

No, because it’s art, and AI is just an advanced copying machine. Open AI is just the newest attempt to leverage artists and workers from their group bargaining power. It’s the scab of the future, but with more carbon emissions.

if you’re a responsible parent that keeps an eye on what their child is doing.

Unfortunately you can’t run a society based on how people should behave. That’s the entire reason we have a legal system and the means to implement safeguards for our population.

It’s probably not that bad, but I wouldn’t be surprised just based on anecdotal experience.

I’m a provider at a children’s hospital and phones have always been an issue during appointments. Before, it was mostly an issue with getting parents to pay attention or answer questions during the evaluation.

However since COVID, we’ve noticed a large increase of parents using tablets and phones as a constant babysitter. These children are so emotionally attached to their screens that they will tantrum until they have access to their screen again.

Whatever you might think about the Cybertruck, it is sold through for at least the next year.

Yeah, but that’s not really saying anything considering that their production numbers have been awful. They claim that they should be able to reach 125k this year, but there have been reports of them only managing to produce around 80 a day, which is only around 30k a year.

And that was before the recent recalls and qc problems. Stainless steel is just an unforgiving material to work with, it’s gonna take them a while to reach mass production while maintaining any kind of quality control measures.

We recently had a person from the hospital cleaning services throw away a 240k prosthetic limb. I felt really bad for the dude, because the prosthetist who was working with it is always super messy, and we do throw away a lot of weird looking stuff. The guy even tried going out to the dumpster and dug around for it.

We convinced the hospital not to fire the guy despite having to file a police report for insurance purposes. Unfortunately, he ended up being let go a couple months later for “unrelated” circumstances.

Still do, I have my pager on me right now. Though I feel they’ve gone down in quality over the years. I usually go through at least one a year, and the buzzer function tends to die after just a few months.