Yes, in those movies, the hot white guys (and sometimes girls) usually ride on top of the muscular horses. So when you want to show a horse riding a man as a visual gag, why not make the man a hot white guy with a gruff beard?
You act as though they first decided to make an image representing Westerners and then chose that particular scene as an intentional insult, but you need to consider that they likely made thousands of test images, most of which were just playing around with the model's capabilities and not specifically crafted for the announcement post.
So why did this one get picked? I think it boils down to the visual gag being funny and the movie-like quality.
If it was a an elf, knight or some sort of fantasy warrior sure with a comedic prompt sure, That is not the case. If you translate the prompt as people have here, you can see what was typed in,'Subdued white man' under 'muscular horse'. Who is the mare in the picture or even the gelding. If I was to do the visual gag it would be a knight or a a warrior not a peasant, there a no peasants in lord of the rings and very few medieval fantasy has peasant of any kind.
Racial/cultural tension is part of the context in which this image is appearing. Not only because of historical tensions, but because this image appears as part of this generation's Manhattan Project style arms race toward AGI and global dominance. Your denial of that is a reflection of your own ignorance.
> The members of the pedophile club are way richer, more influential and have a vastly greater quality of life than you.
Pedophile's "quality of life" is a contradiction in terms. Neither pedophilia nor lust for power are compatible with anything that looks like truth or happiness... and no amount of money can change that. Even more, money can't cure an ego problem.
Totally by accident, a few days ago the richest man in the world whined about the inability of money to deliver happiness... from the horse's mouth.
If I were in it, and somebody pulled out a camera, I'd make damned sure I wasn't in the photo. At a minimum I'd make my disapproval crystal-clear.
That's one of the things I don't get about this whole business. Epstein and Maxwell were constantly taking pictures with famous people, in many/most cases willingly, even after his first conviction. What did those people think was going on?
It could also be that, so often, the claims of what LLMs are achieve are so, so overstated that people feel the need to take it down a notch.
I think lofty claims ultimately hurt the perception of AI. If I wanted to believe AI was going nowhere, I would listen to people like Sam Altman, who seem to believe in something more akin to a religion than a pragmatic approach. That, to me, does not breed confidence. Surely, if the product is good, it would not require evangelism or outright deceit? For example, claiming this implementation was 'clean room'. Words have meaning.
This feat was very impressive, no doubt. But with each exaggeration, people lose faith. They begin to wonder - what is true, and what is marketing? What is real, and what is a cheap attempt for companies to rake in whatever cold hard AI cash they can? Is this opportunistic, like viral pneumonia, or something we should really be looking at?
This reply is argumentum ad personam. We could reverse it and say GenAI companies push this hype down our throats because of fear that they are burning cash with no moat but these kinds of discussions lead nowhere. It's better to focus on core arguments.
reply