Khrux

I can't picture a service which beats Spotify in what they offer which isn't just the same business model but more ethical.

Discovering music for free is an enormous benefit, and the fact that Spotify has practically all mainstream music is nice. People often cite that one quote by Gabe Newell that is "Piracy is not an economic problem. It is a service problem", as a highlight for steam, but largely Spotify offers what consumers want in a way Netflix or Audible can't. They have everything you want and guide your discovery in even more, and as long as their encroaching enshittification doesn't undercut this service, they will continue to underpay artists and fund immoral activities.

The developer of Ultrakill, Hakita, said something which I've often thought about. "You should support indies if you can, but culture shouldn't exist only for those who can afford it. ULTRAKILL wouldn't exist if I hadn't had easy access to movies, music and games growing up. If you don't have money, you can support via word of mouth". There are plenty of independent things I financially support, particularly things I attend in person in the city I live in. I may spend £100 per month paying for art and entertainment all said and done, and when that's spent, I will pirate everything else.

I split a Spotify family plan between 6 friends, I think that's about £3.50 per month, and I pay for no other media services. With video, I run a jellyfin server with a "parent friendly" interface, so they can have "netflix with everything", which I have at my place too. I don't read that much any more, if it's physical I just go to the library and if it's an audiobook I'll just pirate it. The benefit here is that even if I'm on a reading binge, that's not even a book a week. With Spotify, I often pick something and play it via song radio, which is probably 50/50 music I know and new music. Sometimes I just stick albums on, but it's not like that's harder. If I had a locally hosted music repository that I'd "paid for", I could enjoy albums, but not as easily have a radio like discovery experience.

One day, a pirate tool may appear that rivals Spotify, but until that day, I can't see myself moving away from it.

Go to your local live music, drag shows, theatres, independent cinemas and libraries. Don't feel obligated to pay for any internet service.

Coronation chickpea is fine as it's royally forbidden.

I forgot it was commemorative, let's ban coronation chickpea and coronation chicken.

Yeah, he looked like he did on the left through the entire 2010s without changing appearance much, from Narnia 3 to Midsommar. This is absolutely styling above just growing up.

He was actually just there in the water for the reference images, and got left in by mistake.

Funnily enough, when I do ask an LLM to rephrase anything I write, it changes any sentence with a semicolon to one with an em dash. I've probably always overused the semicolon because of its availability on a keyboard, but it appears a lot in my normal work.

Now I trust the semicolon, it's an identifier of me.

I've never made the link between that and gender before (linguistically), it seems obvious in hindsight.

Blurry photos is fine to make an stylistic choice. The 2019 movie The Lighthouse stylistically looked like a 1920s film, before modern music intentionally used bitcrushing, it used vinyl cracks, boomer shooters made in this decade intentionally look like 1990s Doom clones.

When a medium's shortcoming is patched by technology, it ultimately becomes an artifact of the era where it was accidental. Once a few years have passed, it becomes more synonymous with the era than the mistake.

It's not necessarily nostalgia, Gen Alpha and the younger half of Gen Z never grew up without smartphones, so they don't miss the era of poor film photography. Although every generation does this simulation of forgotten mistakes, it's particularly poignant now, where the high quality, perfectly lit, professional feeling photos convey something artificial, i.e. smartphone software emulating camera hardware, faces tuned with filters or outright AI generated content. Even if it's false imperfection, the alternative is false perfection.

Art using deliberate imperfections that were unavoidable in the past is romanticising something perceived as before commercialism, and that's admirable.

I agree. Provided you aren't betraying your own values in the work you do, there's no shame in not taking pride in how you sell your labour. Be are not defined by our jobs.

I've used ChatGPT a little, particularly a few years ago but still on rare occasion now. I won't bother giving it this prompt and wasting the processing but it probably won't be biased, I've been really really surprised with how critical it is of itself. I think by the nature of the dataset it's trained on (i.e. basically everything), it's not really showing any major bias at the moment. It matches my energy and decries capitalism, AI, OpenAI, Sam Altmann etc in a cartoonish, toadie way.

Sadly I don't think being an AI engineer is quite as bullshit, the obvious allegory is someone who provides the syllabus and marks the exams, rather than just doing addition for rich people.

I cannot believe character.ai was valued at over a billion.

^bubble

People disagree because it's still an abstraction of camo. Wearing it in the first place came from people fawning over militarism.

I actually think it can work with a queer look in one of two ways, so you are likely fine: Either it's effectively teasing the pro authoritarian militarism camo types, or it's a radical anarchy armed rebel look, which without praxis is really just the former look again. Either way these are fine.

Another reason maybe you've been downvoted is that people loathe the deep abstraction of modern, or rather postmoderm society. Camo was made for soldiers > Camo was worn by patriotic civilians simulating the soldier aesthetic > particularly under the Bush administration, it became less a symbol of soldiers, and more a symbol of patriots. Patriotism is nationalism.

Today when most of us camo in the military cosplaying way, we think 'nationalist'. When we see a person in a little bit of camo, perhaps just some came shorts and a regular t-shirt, we think either 'nationalist', 'okay with nationalism' or 'ignorant of nationalism'.

So when most people see someone in a blended queer and camo look, they probably assume one of three things: 'ignorant of nationalism', 'critical of nationalism in a rebellious manner' or 'pro nationalist queer'. Of course one of these is fine, but one is very bad.