You think paying lip service is a good thing?

Then we end up with fascists in power and friends being rounded up. I’ll choose the lesser of two evils every fucking time when given a choice

You are a lib. They are both fascists.

Do you read the text you’re quoting?

is a rhetorical tactic of attacking the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than the substance of the argument itself.

It is making the argument about you instead of about the argument. There is no argument with an insult. It is not “making the argument about you” it’s just an insult. It is only when the character is tied to the argument that you see an Ad Hominem. You monumental idiot <- Also not an ad hominem.

There’s even more than one form - as I also wrote for you. Learn some basic english, for gods’ sake. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/fallacies#letter-A

I’m going to block you now. You’ve shown yourself to be so thickheaded you can read and quote a piece of text and still not understand it. Talking to you is an embarassment, you absolute oxheaded brick.

An ad hominem isn’t when I insult you you fucking idiot. Its literally right there where you quote me. Read the text you actual imbecile. Click the link to realise youre such a common halfwit that this text is a copypasta.

Lmao all of you idiots say the same shit and you all open your mouths without understanding the words coming out. It’s happening so often there is no need to write anything new, since it’s all already been written:

Thats not what an ad hominem is you fucking idiot. You fool, you buffoon. Learn what the concepts you speak of mean, you absolute dolt.
An ad hominem isn’t “when you get insulted.” An ad hominem is when the quality of your character is tied to the quality of your argument - Something plenty of people do here all the time.
And you’re even fucking it more up, because the person isn’t even insulting you, unless you count yourself to be someone without a brain! Fucking incredible moronic self-own.

“You suck” is not an ad hominem. “You suck and your argument sucks” is also not an ad hominem. “You suck and therefore your statement sucks” is an ad hominem.
Now, an ad hominem does not need to make the correlation between character and argument overt. It is enough that the argument is dismissed on the basis of the person making it, though not every case where this happens will be an ad hominem.

More examples:
“Youre a Russian propagandist and I dont listen to Russian propaganda!” <- Adhummer
“Youre a bot, so I dont have to engage” <- add hummus
“Typical statement from .ml users, youre all saying silly stuff” <- alt host

Calling you brainless is just calling you brainless. It is only when the argument is dismissed directly or indirectly through this personal demeaning that it is a logical fallacy. And it doesn’t even have to be an insult! But you’re too fucking stupid to see that, you just throw words around that you have picked up thru cultural osmosis without ever learning them. Idiot.

Cowbee, im sorry, but as you yourself say this isn’t a settled question at all. There is some common ground we can agree on, but after that there’s many different assertions one can make, all with decent reasoning behind. Those assertions can then be related to in a few reasonable ways as well.
What we can agree on is that most gen-ai right now is not made with locally run models using renewable energy and the data used to train those models does come from massive data centers. There are people using locally run models and there’s probably someone doing something renewable and there’s some who have their own smaller models that dont rely on data centres, but they are quite far from being the norm.

So unless otherwise stated I assume it is an average user of an average gen-ai.
Then the other assertion is that people find it easier to dismiss AI-slop - easier even than some meme, which means AI slop makes for poor agitprop. At this point there is plenty to be pointed towards going for and against this assertion, so its not settled in any real way. As such, I doubt we are able to come to a consensus at the moment.
Another assertion is the one I made about normalisation. If there is anything that can be solved thru discussion at the moment it might be that, but honestly it isn’t the big reason im against it, since normalisation is only bad under current circumstances in my eyes.

Right now they’re calling him lazy or ignorant. Very funny.

All your clichés have been talked through. There’s good reason people dont vote or don’t vote democrat.

Vote, or bulld a guillotine

Ah yes the classic refrain of libs when the obvious farce of electorialism is critiqued: “Ok then start a revolution RIGHT NOW!” or “Okay then go out and kill all rich people yourself this very instance!!”

Somehow you understand the concept of long-term thinking when it comes to kicking the can down the road, but not when it comes to trying anything else.

No, its just socialist. Socialism is a transitory state towards communism. Presence of capitalist elements does not make a state less socialist, as long as it is run by a dictatorship of the proletariat, which it is.

So, if someone generates an image on their laptop using solar power, using locally run hardware, is it still inherently wrong?

It is not inherently wrong. In your use case I would have less issue with it.

What is the advantage to artisinally fashioning a meme with the same message, when memes are inherently a low-effort, mass-produced form of social expression?

I do not mean to be rude, but I struggle to see how I did not answer this with the “the medium is part of the message” part.

I think this usage of gen AI is bad because it produces pure slop and further normalises gen AI slop even in leftist circles. I think AI-slop is bad due to the resources required to produce it as well as it helping advance the legitimisation of gen-AI “art”, which alleviates pressure on large companies to avoid it, which then leads to them using gen AI slop instead of something produced by artists.
I think “slop” for memes are bad because memes have potential to be more than mere brainrot, but since the medium is part of the message and the medium of AI-slop sends a message that the contents are so unserious the creator could not even be bothered to do the bare minimum of work, then the content can be dismissed immediately - It makes for bad agitprop.

I am not against all AI all the time. I am against frivolous usage of something that fucks up the climate, requires the construction of massive data centres - especially during a time where all resources ought to be directed towards climate change - and I think we have to be mindful of how automation fucks up the job market, while we live in a world where it is a bad thing when people have to do less work.

I’m not arguing from some standpoint of AI slop being “morally impure”.

You said “Critiquing your specific use of a specific tool is not the same as critiquing participation in capitalist society or consumption of capitalist goods.”

Yeah, I did. And in my response I also laid that out for you. Yet you somehow ignored that and instead pretend using any tool for any reason is what is being discussed now? And you’re taking the side of using any tool for any reason, so can I safely assume you assume killing people is awesome since knives are tools too and they’re used for murder sometimes? I figure that must be the case, since I described the difference between the two “tools” and the specific usecase here, yet that somehow went right past you, so it must not matter to you. Kind of fucked up of you to support people being blown up with dynamite btw. Wild you support using tools to construct F-35s and other bombs used by the imperialist warmachine.

By the way, trains aren’t tools, unless we expand the definition of tool in the context of this discussion to include all modes of transportation, and at that point it seems like an almost pointless descriptor.

Seeing as how the comment we’re both referring to is still there for you to read and it mentions the use of AI to generate an image macro, and not any travel for any purpose on board a train in India, I’m going to give you just one guess as to what tool you think Im referring to.

Cannot criticise capitalism while existing in capitalism

Not what they’re saying. Critiquing your specific use of a specific tool is not the same as critiquing participation in capitalist society or consumption of capitalist goods.

Yeah, I think its me misinterpreting them. The last message made me reevaluate.

Incredible, no other information out there to corroborate what Kyiv reports, absolutely none. No information at all. It’s like a vacuum of information about what Ukraine does.

Do you struggle with reading or something? Literally the first post in this comment chain is me asking for more sources.

But instead it’s all about you 💕 poor thing, that’s not allowed to believe whatever you feel best.

Okay, so you do struggle with reading? Because you somehow manage to read something I didnt write. Is it because making up a person to argue against is the only way you can win an argument, or is there some other reason you fuck up relating to what it is people say?

I found them to be disingenuous with the way they engaged and I found their slop annoying, but their latest comment was reasonable, which made me reevaluate the interaction. I also just threw a lot of insults at someone misusing “ad hominem” because I think that’s a funny bit, but that action put me in a mudslinging mindset.

I can call you names if you feel like it would give you some catharsis

My bad. Appreciate the callout.