SDF Chatter

Do you use any forks instead of default Firefox? If yes, which ones and why?

I find this move concerning, and wish that the Founder had looked for a new CEO that shared his values rather than a Private Equity and Mergers Expert.

Furthermore, the change to the GRIT motto is worrying. Trust is useless without Transparency when it comes to code and security.

look at her. but! but, more importantly: look at her dress.

wowie. zowie. like - gosh - dressies which have a kind of bib part in the front just - like - they feel and look so safe and comforting....

just like - like - really tho, look how safe krita girl looks right here.

turns out she has a name!!!! "Kiki the Cyber-Squirrel" wow! what a very cutie name <3 very mmuch huge fan of Kiki now.

just... i cant get enough of it. whenever theres a - a square-type bib on a dress or on essentially any clothing i get super super excited and point and go "THERE!!! dressie!"

anyway-

how are you doing today? ~

alternative image link (blahaj zone)

---

brainmade in case people are wondering

FSR 4.1 running on RDNA3 or RDNA2 GPUs may take a bigger performance hit.

(Silhouette052) (2026)

Image description: A person is shown from behind against a black background, their short hair glowing in shades of blue. Their back and neck appear illuminated with swirling gradients of turquoise, green, and deep blue, forming a paint-platter pattern.

(kageno) (2026)

Image description: A woman with purple eyes, long purple hair, and a neutral facial expression stands with her left hand on her hip. She wears a dark gray blazer over a purple horizontally striped top, a blue denim skirt, and a black shoulder bag with gold buckles. She is positioned on a reddish-brown paved walkway bordered by a low gray curb and a manicured green hedge. The background consists of out-of-focus green foliage and dense trees under a bright sky.

Has anyone tried Nym VPN? I know it's different from Mullvad VPN, Proton VPN, and IVPN as it's decentalized, but aside from that, what else makes it stand out from the others? It looks interesting and was thinking about trying it out, but I know it's a newer VPN and I haven't been able to find reviews about it and wanted to see if it's even worth it.

Management may eventually purge engineers that won’t adopt AI.

And I watched a video yesterday that perfectly encapsulated everything that is wrong with Britain. The whole thing. A lifetime of systemic failure, of grotesque inequality, of ruling-class contempt disguised as concern, all of it distilled into a single glittering, nauseating image.

There he was. King Charles III. Dressed in his finest robes, the Imperial State Crown on his head (this is a solid gold construction studded with 2,868 diamonds, 17 sapphires, 11 emeralds, 269 pearls, and four rubies). The Sovereign’s Sceptre with Cross contains the largest clear-cut diamond in the world, weighing in at 530 carats…was present but not in the shot. The crown jewels are estimated to be worth up to $8 billion in total. And this man, wearing a hat that could solve homelessness in London, who holds a stick that could fund the NHS for a year, draped in robes worth more than most people will earn in a thousand lifetimes, was telling the British people to ‘weather the storm’ of the cost of living crisis.

Crosspost from https://lemmygrad.ml/post/11612563

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1127117/shl0ms-famous-prankster-on-x-twitter-baited-ai-haters-by-posting-a-real-painting-by-mone

Comments

• Hacker News;
• Reddit.

Context

The painting is one of the 250 oil paintings in the renowned French Impressionist painter Claude Monet’s Water Lilies series in which he depicted scenes from his home flower garden over the final 31 years of his life.

As the post went viral, many of the critics began deleting their replies, but @SHL0MS and other users such as @Jediwolf took screenshots of some of the best replies before they disappeared.

Individual replies

Critics, however, were eager to point out all kinds of “obvious” details that show why the “AI” Monet can’t hold a candle to a genuine Monet. One person even took the time to write out an 850-word breakdown of the AI work’s shortcomings.

“I’m disappointed I have to even point it out,” writes @egg_oni. “There is no cohesion to the depth and color choices. The reflection of the tree bleeds into the lilypads with no regard for spatial depth or contrast. The background lilypad-algae amalgam is egregiously vague, like most AI art.”

“The reflection in AI art is just noise splattered right,” writes @jordoxx. “Monet actually understood how light behaves on water.”

“The choice of color in places e.g. the purple around the lily pads sticks out to me as decidedly worse than most Monet,” writes @0xchiefyeti. “I get a sense that the artist failed to connect their eyes to the brush/palette […]”

“No frame, no sense of the threshold between subject and object, just colors,” writes @robertjett_.

“I would say that the allegedly real one here is superior in the sense that it carries, and conveys more information than the artificial one,” writes @artprograce. “The dark cold reflection of the trees triggers my attention. They strike me as slightly off, too dirty, and too pronounced to be natural.”

“I’m no artist but a real Monet actually looks like a real place…” writes @amaldorai. “the further back you get in this picture the less it looks like anything at all.”

“Depth, contrast, and cohesion are the most obvious,” writes @para_dim3. “There’s also no clear focal point.”

“It feels less lively,” writes @AzuriSplashes. “It lacks the texture, the rugged edges, the folds, the crevices and creases and bevels and topology of plastic arts. The fine, calculated highlights. The AI version is granulated pixelation, and it looks that way, it lacks the mess of humanity.”

“The fact that it looks like s**t and is s**t,” writes @RDL0013 in a since-deleted reply. “Slop. Doesn’t look anywhere near like a Monet. Looks exactly like somebody trying to replicate style and achieving like 20% of it. Not as vibrant as Monet’s typical choice of colors. Looks dull.”

“There’s no coherent composition,” writes @HundtRichard. “The eye is drawn to the 1/3rd from bottom, 1/3rd from left region and there’s nothing really to focus on. The lilly’s contrast is too low and the negative space around it too cluttered. The surface texture in the water regions are too vertical.”

“[T]here is no consistency in colour choice,” writes @Polymind_. “The view looks obscured perspective wise and feels like there is too much detail in the AI version, which if I am thinking correctly comes back again to the colours being so distinct and contrasty.”

“As an amateur art enjoyer, the only criticism I can offer is that the AI generated image does not make me feel anything,” writes @ThrosturTh. “It does not conjure emotion, thought or wonder. It’s just a colorful wallpaper pattern. If you look up ‘monet painting’ in Google images, you feel something.”

“There’s a certain harshness, no soft blending of colors, no depth, no symbiosis of the elements,” writes @JesTer396.

“The AI seems to be unable to distinguish plant reflections and submerged plants, for one,” writes @DavyRogue27930. “It’s combining tokens from the two randomly and the result is an incoherent muddle of inconsistently saturated greens.”

“Spatial coherence,” writes @enfilmigult. “The phony gen-AI pic isn’t getting it right and the reflections look like they’re growing out of the water. You look at the painting and instantly see the angle of the water surface. Also those lily pads are hideous, looks like someone drew on them.”

“Because it’s crap. That simple,” writes @nightingale9181. “This ain’t no painting. No talent to it. AI needs to go.”

“I present you with my eye lines, thickness denotes how quickly my eye moved,” writes @KEMOS4BE in a since deleted post, which included helpful illustrations. “One has a sensible, meandering composition that fits the subject.”

People are pointing out that results of this experiment are in line with what studies have shown about how people perceive art differently in light of how it was produced. The famous 2004 Kruger study into something called the effort heuristic found that people liked and valued artworks more if they believe they took more time and effort to create.

There is also a natural human bias against AI. A 2024 study published in Nature found that while people generally prefer AI-generated artworks over human-made ones when they didn’t know they were AI-generated, they preferred AI art less after finding out that AI was behind it.

The Post.

(TikTok screencap)