It’s not dada. It’s too coherent to be dada, and it’s too shit to be anything else.

In order for something to be an artistic choice, it has to be a choice. It has to have meaning and intent. AI did not choose to put a glass there, it calculated that there was probably a glass there based on shitty reasoning. AI does not have the creative capacity to make art. It can only make images, and those images are shit.

You’ve thoroughly proven you can’t tell between slop and high art, so thank you for the compliment of my critique.

Surrealism is not nonsense. It has a purpose, even if that purpose is hard to tell. If you think Dali and AI slop is the same, you don’t understand either.

AI is like a housefire. Nobody wants it. Nobody needs it. It’s just a bad thing, and if someone sees it, they’re more than justified in being upset and trying to get rid of it. Don’t defend the fire, or you’ll be the first to burn.

So is toast.

I’ll stop saying it if it stops being true.

False. Porn is sexy, and I can’t possibly be aroused by an image of a woman spreading her cheeks when her fingers are attached to her arse with a continuous piece of flesh, giving her skin the same topography as a teapot.

Funny. Every time someone points out how god awful AI is, someone else comes along to say “It’s just a tool, and it’s good if someone can use it properly.” But nobody who uses it treats it like “just a tool.” They think it’s a workman they can claim the credit for, as if a hammer could replace the carpenter.

Plus, the only people good enough to fix the problems caused by this “tool” don’t need to use it in the first place.

Looks good. Approve

Most tools aren’t actively detrimental to use, though. It’s like a hammer where the handle is covered in spikes. Even if you’re a genius and know how to hold it without cutting your hand, most people would just use a different hammer. And I’m not going to let that toolsmith off the hook, either.

“I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.”

~ Mark Twain

If it takes longer to write the truth, then it’s telling you took the quicker approach.

Completely agree. I’m pretty sure the best campaign premise has people going “I’m listening” in 10 words or less.

Sky island swashbuckler. Set on a floating archipelago where people travel by airship, the party are each given a classic swashbuckler motive and set to adventure.

I don’t care specifics or ruleset. I just want the heroes to throw a villain over the edge and let him fall a thousand feet into the ocean.

It was very funny to see them say that, then say “no assholes” with a straight face.

A few favourites from the Alexandrian:

• Don’t prep plots. Prep scenarios. If you give the players a goal and a world, they will make the plot themselves, and it’ll be more interesting. And it’s not like you wouldn’t need those things for a railroad plot anyway.
• Don’t plan contingencies. Instead of explaining everything the party could do to get past the guard, just describe the guard. It’s a lot more flexible, and it takes less time to prepare.
• With the 3 clues rule, make sure to have different clue types. If all your clues are pieces of evidence, then a party who prefers to talk to people is clueless.
• If you feel the need to ask “are you sure you want to do that”, there might be a miscommunication to figure out. Maybe you didn’t explain the situation clearly, or a player misheard you, or the player has an item to help things work out.
• When creating a system within your setting (eg, nobility), add two exceptions to the neat and tidy rules. “Each region is ruled by a count, except for those over there which are ruled by comtes.” This adds history to your world while making it less daunting to add more exceptions if you need them later.

I found a map-making site that is, let’s be honest, shit. The maps it makes can only ever be “good enough”, and never great. This means I don’t waste time trying to make them great, and can actually finish the dang things. Plus, if the players decide not to go to the noble manor, then it’s no big loss.

This idea goes for a lot of the game, actually. If you spend less time on the story, then it’s no big loss if the plot takes a tangent. And they probably weren’t going to be as invested in a forced narrative as they would be for something more organic.

If you and Elon disagree about something, just assume he’s wrong about it. If you both agree on something, THEN you might be mistaken.

This should get bonus points for incrementing i by 1 as part of the process for incrementing i by 1.

Humans, probably. Just look at the impact COVID had on the environment.

Does Robogeisha count? A robot chops a building and the building bleeds, and I don’t know if that counts as “bad” or “transcendent human experience”.

Trailer, for the curious.

A + B = C
A = X
D != Y
X + Y = Z
B = Y
Does C = Z?