Hyper-detailed foreground with a blurry background and a subject matter that falls into the uncanny valley? Yeah, that all checks out.
E2A: Zoom in on smaller sections and it becomes more obvious. Objects that should be in the same depth of field have different levels of blur, patterns don’t follow rules, it looks like the jacket has buttons, but half of a zipper on one side? There’s a lot of little things.
You are good at pointing out what feels wrong in the image. It could be a case of very heavy editing or AI-powered filters without necessarily being completely ai generated but I still stand by my initial impression that it gives and AI vibe and you are right about why
Yup, that seam/twist there on the foreground is almost a definitive giveaway
Edit: I mean I guess that especially a rich person could, for some reason, wear a weird ass scarf designed by someone who thinks in a very out-of-the-box way… but which is more likely?
I mean I guess that especially a rich person could, for some reason, wear a weird ass scarf designed by someone who thinks in a very out-of-the-box way… but which is more likely?
This is douchebag Musk we’re talking about. Either one is equally possible, lol.
Whether he used an AI generator or not, it’s possible. But honestly, I could easily see him paying for a photoshoot for this since he announced moving SpaceX to Texas.
Fair, I wasn’t wondering if he did or didn’t post (I guess it could have been a fake tweet too, one can never be too sure). Just pointing at the aesthetics in the image, there’s something uncanny about it
Not to come off as a musk fan-boy (I am most certainly not), but that’s a damn good photograph. Absolutely a professional photoshoot with hilariously high-end wardrobe.
You may be right. A few other comment here have remarked at his neckerchief being not quite right. That also doesn’t exclude the possibility for a digital touch-up, or a photoshoot as a dedicated training model for AI.
If it’s real, I’m confident he had some competent assistant hire a competent crew for that photo-op. I’m guessing a competent PR consultant suggested a good photo-op in the first place, hit the right buttons to appeal to his wannabe cool image.
If it’s fake, some competent developer created a good tool, fed with competently selected data to create a rather convincing image.
What I’m trying to say is that there most certainly were several competent people involved in the making of this picture.
One of the community notes on the post said it was posted the day before by another account, and an AI image detector flagged it as AI with 90% confidence.
Musk using an AI image to fantasize about being some badass cowboy is both pathetic and absolutely expected lol
If he’d gone and bought a cowboy hat in the last few weeks, they would’ve at least attempted to sell him a summer hat (straw) instead of a winter hat (felt). Not definitive but strange.
Just sign up for corpo-pass! As you drive through the toll, your Zelle account will be charged automatically. You hereby agree to all fine print as you drive past it.
Interesting. Looks like perhaps your boot loader isn’t properly pointing at your root partition.
I’m assuming you’ve just done the install and never successfully booted, yes? In that case, you can try to re-run the installer, or try rescue mode and try repairing the bootloader.
Are you doing dual-booting, or is this system dedicated to Linux?
Yes, I have not been able to successfully boot yet. I have already rerun the installer and tried every solution I could find online in rescue mode. Tried repairing grub too.
For all intents and purposes, a markup document is a script that outputs a document. There’s no point in saying the HTML isn’t a programming language. Not all languages have to be general purpose.
The bar for me is whether the language describes an executable program that has state and control flow.
You could perhaps be generous and describe the DOM as a (write-only) state and the parser as a control flow. I don’t, personally.
HTML is just a data container format to me. Belongs with the likes of XML, JSON, JPG, PNG, GIF, MP3, MOV, etc.
The umbrella term I’d use for all of these is “coding”. That’s the skill of understanding structured languages and format specifications, and understanding how you can and can’t piece things together to make something coherent. This is a critical requisite skill to programming. But programming is more.
Programming is the art of juggling of state and control flow in clever ways to trick funny rocks into computing something you don’t know. It doesn’t need to be general purpose, but I would argue it indeed needs to have a purpose. It has to be something more than just a pile of declarations you know from the outset. Otherwise it’s just structured data.
The umbrella term I’d use for all of these is “coding”.
Saying “it’s not programming it’s coding” is like engineer “it’s not dirt it’s soil” levels of pedantry that are silly to expect people outside your profession to know.
Sure. Which is why I would only make this distinction in a place where I can reasonably expect people to know better. Like, perhaps, a niche community on an experimental social media platform dedicated to programming.
Coding is, like, the smallest aspect out of all of programming. And unfortunately the part that’s the most fun.
But if you’re a coder, I assume you don’t know how to design complex systems, just (maybe) implement them or parts of them. That’s not what defines programming.
(Disclaimer, in all fairness: that’s in my personal, layman opinion as someone who doesn’t know much theory. I might just be very very in the wrong here, lol.)
No, my question does not imply a pure functional language at all. Pure functions exist in languages which are not purely functional. Most of the functions I write are pure functions. I could have a workflow where I work with another programmer who handles the minimal stateful pieces, and I would only write stateless functions - would that make me not a programmer?
(There are also purely functional languages, by the way. I just didn’t remotely imply there were, or make any claims about them, at any point in this thread, prior to this parenthetical.)
The part about declarative languages has nothing to do with state, or functional languages. Declarative languages are a whole different thing. Of course declarative languages handle state. The comment I was replying to said “Programming is the art of juggling of state and control flow”. Declarative languages don’t involve juggling control flow.
Stateless functions still deal with state, they just don’t hold onto it. Without state to mutate, a so-called stateless function doesn’t do anything.
In declarative languages, your state is the sum of everything you’ve declared. You don’t query results out of thin air. Computational results logically conclude from everything you set up.
HTML ““has state””, as in it has a DOM, but it doesn’t do anything with it. You don’t mutate the DOM after it’s built, or query the DOM to compute results that weren’t trivially evident from the state you declared.
You can do those things with JavaScript. But all that proves is JavaScript is a programming language, and HTML is just a data format it can interact with.
Programming is the art of juggling of state and control flow
Sure, stateless functions deal with and impact state in some way. If that’s what you meant by your previous comment, that’s fine, but that’s honestly not what would typically be meant by “juggling” state.
The part about declarative languages has nothing to do with state. Declarative languages do not give the programmer control over flow, the other part of your definition.
Learn Lisp, and you will never again be so certain about the difference between a programming language and a data format.
Not really. If so, you might as well consider the stuff you can use to format a comment here on lemmy, as “programming”. That’s conceptually more similar to HTML as what programming actually is.
To my knowledge, Scratch can save information away and retrieve it later. That’s enough to be programming. There are Theory of Computation reasons for this; it’s not an arbitrary distinction.
That’s such a weird point to make. Is it because to you, it seems like the line drawn is arbitrary? I cannot imagine any other reason. Certain words just mean certain things.
Markup languages are exactly as much “programming” as you marking a word and hitting “bold”. Which is to say, nothing at all. People are wrong all the time, and I have a very limited amount of fucks to give when it happens.
As for Scratch, it is a programming language. So, why would you think it’s a logical next step for me to say otherwise? Next, you’ll say something remarkably dumb in response. Resist the temptation, and do something more productive.
If he had said “LaTeX” or “roff”, that might have been a good example of something that blurs the line between the two. They aren’t specifically intended to be programming languages, but with a powerful enough macro system, a markup or typesetting language can be used in the same way as something like Brainfuck.
Absolutely. Those you suggest there are good examples.
Good enough that, instead of “is/isn’t” programming language, it would be more a “ah, so, how do you define that then?”. Now that I’ve had some sleep, one could argue that I could have been nicer and suggested that approach for HTML as well. After all, it’s just words that mean stuff, and transfer a concept between people, that translate to the same (ish) idea. The moment the latter isn’t the case, it’s no longer very useful for the former.
Most disagreements, I find, are just cases of different understandings. Discussions worth having is when both are correct but different, and both want to figure out why they differ. So, on second thought, I think I was appropriately rude ^_^
Both LaTeX and roff are Turing complete, but they are also DSLs with a somewhat narrow “domain”. Sounds exactly right that these blur the lines between what is/isn’t. You could even argue that claiming one or the other is just one way to express how you understand that difference.
As I said, not all programing languages are general purpose. Just because there are problems it can’t solve does not mean it’s not a programming language.
No. A form can’t do anything except send data to a server or get handled in the browser by Javascript (or Typescript or whatever). In either case, HTML is not capable of storing or retrieving anything on its own. It only provides an interface for potentially doing that.
True. Once I was working on a WPF app and someone looked at it and then showed me a simple YAML file they put together for Ansible and legit thought ‘YAML was better’ and what I was doing was dumb. They considered themselves a programmer.
Actually, there are plenty of interpreted programming languages, for example Perl or Shell Script so that definition is incorrect.
HTML is not a programming language because it only defines form (how things look), and does not control action (executing operations by itself).
The language for Web Development that controls the execution of operations (say: if the user fills a certain field, fetch related data from a server and display it in certain page areas) is called Javascript and is separate from HTML (which existed before Javascript and can exist without it).
Modern Web standards have also moved a lot of the form stuff to yet another language - CSS, Cascading Style Sheets - which is more powerful and reusable, so HTML is more used for the visual structure of the page and less for things like the fonts of the various pieces of text, though it still contains support for that stuff and you can still use it.
What’s nice here is that the upvote to comment ratio is pretty low compared to reddit and other platforms, meaning one upvote here means a lot more than one upvote on reddit.
Also each post sparks cool and unique discussions so you get more out of reading and participating in the comment section.
Hi, it would be useful to know what kind of device you are installing on. For a laptop the model and make would be especially useful. If it is a PC then the drive configuration would be interesting (what kind of drive, how many etc.)
Ok, that looks like a fairly standard setup. I guess taking a look at the boot loader itself would be the next step. When you see the Debian bootloader you could try pressing ‘e’ to view what commands it uses internally to boot. The lines starting with “linux” and “initrd” would be most interesting.
IIRC they avoid “Birth” like the plague because in Sovcit world “birth” actually means “berth” and means you’re actually cargo bound by admiralty law or something nutty like that.
lemmy.world
Active