Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid!

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutā€™nā€™paste it into its own post, thereā€™s no quota for posting and the bar really isnā€™t that high

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many ā€œesotericā€ right wing freaks, but thereā€™s no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iā€™m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged ā€œculture criticsā€ who write about everything but understand nothing. Iā€™m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyā€™re inescapable at this point, yet I donā€™t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnā€™t be surgeons because they didnā€™t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canā€™t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

    • self@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      Ā·
      2 months ago

      I keep hearing this shit from creatively bankrupt folks and fash billionaires, because itā€™s very important to them that art and creativity isnā€™t for us ā€” itā€™s an expensive relic of the past and a commodity that only they can afford. itā€™s fucking ghoulish, but that goes without saying with Sammy

      what none of them seem to have an answer for is the obvious chicken and egg problem that their weird fucking conjecture leads to. if creativity isnā€™t possible, where in fuck did all the art come from? these assholes assert that modern artists just remix their inputs like a fucking generative AI, which is plainly false to anyone who knows artists or has even objectively evaluated generative AI outputs, but where in fuck did historical artists get their inputs from if weā€™re supposing thatā€™s true? generative AI copies, but thereā€™s nothing to copy from when thereā€™s no original.

      and thatā€™s not meant to give a single inch to these shitheads and allow the fash idea that true art comes from some fantasy version of history either. modern artists do fucking fantastic creative work ā€” when theyā€™re not shackled by the capitalist systems that keep shitheads like Sammy boy buying expensive, unchallenging art pieces purely as a tax dodge

    • sinedpick@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      Ā·
      2 months ago

      Itā€™s hard to understand what Samuel Alternativeman hopes to accomplish by making such statements. Does he want everyone to give up on being creative and just defer to AI? Does he think that without a source of real creativity for training, his products have any value at all?

      • Mii@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        Ā·
        2 months ago

        Heā€™s either trying to generate new critihype by making Clippy intelligent again (ā€œIt learns just like those pesky hoomans do!ā€), or slither his way out of that lawsuit by claiming it couldnā€™t have stolen original ideas when there have never been any original ideas in the first place.

        Iā€™m still trying to figure out whatā€™s stupider.

        • o7___o7@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          Ā·
          2 months ago

          ā€œIt learns just like those pesky hoomans do!ā€

          Itā€™s Furbies all over again