Surenho

I back this up. There is a state well studied in animals called hopelessness. Animals of diverse taxa can and will develop depression-related or depression-like behaviours and even self harm, not even necessarily at an old age. The same logic OP uses to question euthanasia is the one we use to understand them and make decisions. We know they will not communicate as humans, and we know we are directly responsible for their (pets) quality of life. This creates the consensus that we have to infer their emotional state and assume them capable of suffering based on their physiology. This (through studying their physiological and behavioural responses) is how we learn for example that dysplasia can be very painful, or that lack of certain standards of care can cause immense suffering. For humans we have the big problem of Christianity, that permeates western notions and confuses morals with ethics, stating that all life is sacred and god intended your suffering for some divine purpose. So much so that suicide was considered a crime and would ban you from heaven. But in more developed places the idea of self requested euthanasia is slowly being better understood.

We don't have a "right" to do so, we have a "responsibility" to give them the best we can provide.

So... Everyone is John? Dnd players keep reinventing the wheel and patting themselves in the back for it.

You can see this is clearly fake when the crab is shown having to be literate to run for office.

Change that letter for "th".

This rings so much for nordic countries too.

Not necessarily the topic itself, but many factors affect IQ tests performance. Our perception and assessment of the world around us is strongly biased by our culture and education. The one factor you mentioned being the language is amongst many but its relevance should not be downplayed.

I admit I wrote that comment being reductionist. Mostly because IQ tests and the conversation around them is often reductionist too, and lends itself to western elitism. The history of the study of intelligence is terrible and we should be better at dealing with the topic these days.

Some examples of bias: https://neurolaunch.com/many-intelligence-tests-are-biased-in-that-they/ https://www.science.org/content/article/what-does-iq-really-measure

In any case, people should start viewing IQ testing as "cultural testing". We know it doesn't really capture "intelligence" but a western way of thinking about things. So basically some twins are more educated in western thinking than their siblings, and it has to do with their upbringing into the culture. Not surprised.

In my opinion this is too large of an attempt at reasoning memes as equal to an artist made piece of art but it is full of fallacies. The same images from memes being used can be traced and attributed to its original author with ease, AI cannot. So I'd argue that AI stealing is even more blatant as it attempts to hide its origin. AI makes people think they actually did something and partook in creating the piece, which is like taking an image off the internet and saying you made it. You can edit it, but it is not the same as saying you are the creator. AI blurs the line of ownership by including an algorithm in between, but it is being used to try and heavily commercialise its output in a way that memes never had. You say in italics a fallacy on the style of "memes occasionally can be profitable, therefore it is equivalent to selling AI art", but I think you know how different the reality of both forms is. It is exactly the intent behind the majority of AI image generation to industrialise art, while it is not the case of memes, and you see the same pushback if a company tries to use someone's photo commercially/politically without their consent. In a meme, the image is not the main product, but the context in which it is being used, so the image can be actually replaced but not the same can be done with the text.

And true, I'd argue there's also a component of inherent rejection of AI generated images because it is clear it "destroys art creation" in the sense that artists experience the world and create from said experience in connection with their own perception and ideas, while AI "remixes" said work without any understanding or self input and steals people's expression that is currently being aimed explicitly for commercial purposes. Meme makers do something far better than AI. If all art would be made by AI there would be no art. The only way I'd be ok with it is if you give the neural network sensors to perceive reality and process ideas and thoughts, to then create its own interpretation and expression. I guess it would be interesting to see "art" without emotion.

You pull out of nowhere that most people against AI are not artists, but that kind of claim needs some support behind it. Similarly to how you claim that people against AI art have nothing against using other people's work for memes without their consent. That kind of whataboutism does not contribute to the discussion, as it is just pointing to a "but they do that so I can do this" lame excuse. Sure, people should be more respectful about other people's images, so what.

Even with all of this, I do agree that using people's images for memes without their consent is bad. Doubt it can be stopped but I'd not be surprised if they are strongly affected by it. Empathy is scarce these days and makes me act a bit more bitter on the internet.

I call BS, no mention of Kingdom Come: Deliverance 1 and 2 and no Cyberpunk. They fail to give a clear idea of what qualifies as a rpg, but I guess the definition itself is a bit too broad.

Kingdom Come: Deliverance 1 & 2: 👌🏻

Bad bad google! Spanky spank for you! (Google revenue)

You might think it is normal for you as you have the habit, but I know plenty of people that do not give handshakes or any form of physical contact. So it is a possibility that she might find it awkward and unnecessary, and so it catches her off guard. As others pointed out, thinking about why that happens is pointless and though you might wonder this to be thoughtful, it's better to just wait for her to raise the hand instead of you. If she does not, then there's no need.