Hmmm, send it back to R&D. The expelled gasses going directly into the horn would only produce a single-toned “HONK”. Instead, those gasses could be used to inflate a cuff that’s wrapped around a more traditional style clown horn bulb, squeezing the bulb and producing that same noise; but as the cuff loses pressure and bulb reinflates, the air it draws back will produce second tone, providing the clown horn’s signature “HEE-HAW” that our prospective murder victims expect and deserve.
Dude, I’m a surgical tech - my job is to stand in an OR and be a surgeon’s bitch while we’re flaying some fucker open. …and I still spend what feels like 90% of my day on Outlook -_-
Not censorship, but enshitification. Reddit has been steering in an anti-user direction for quite a while. Killing the 3rd party apps that made that site useable was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
People who whine about being booted over “personal beliefs” tend to conveniently neglect to mention what those beliefs are. If you feel strongly that pineapple should absolutely NEVER go on pizza, then I’ll disagree with you and leave it at that; if you get booted from a community over that opinion, yeah that’s fucking crazy and indicative of a community that should be abandoned anyway. If you feel strongly about things like gay people should be killed or women should have restricted rights, then I’ll disagree with you and report your ass for every comment that even hints at bigotry, cuz you’re a horrible person and are absolutely not welcome here.
I saw a study that concluded toilet seats in public restrooms were actually one of the cleanest surfaces in the restroom. Don’t dispute that - it just means that the entire area lands somewhere in the spectrum between disgusting and eldritch nightmare. Due to the finding that the toilet seats were cleaner than most other surfaces in the restroom, it further concluded that it was perfectly safe to just plop down bare-assed onto that nastiness.
Abso-fucking-lutely not. The toilet paper bird-nest is a must. A few layers of splash protection toilet paper in the water before I even sit down is a must. ‘Ick’ factor aside, there are enough contact acquired pathogens to justify extreme caution in environments like that. I ain’t risking ass warts over some hypothesis, study, full-blown peer reviewed theory, or anything in between.
Reading through the comments, I think OP’s question is skipping the root of the controversy here, which is whether or not that content even is art.
As a child of the 90s, a good example that comes to mind would be something like the Windows Media Visualizer - colorful and fun to look at, but it’s just an algorithm interpreting a sound.
If I sneezed into a microphone, ran that recording through Windows Media Player, then posted a screenshot of the swirly colors here exclaiming “Hey Lemmy - Do you like this art I made?” …would that even be an honest question? It’d probably just get downvoted cuz folks would take one look at it and conclude “You didn’t make that, and it’s not art.”
If I posted that same picture but instead with the title “Lol I sneezed into Windows Media Player, and the visualizer went nuts!” I’d probably get a more positive response - it’d still be a shitpost, but readers wouldn’t feel like they’re being lied to.
So… is an algorithm even capable of producing art?
And if no, is it the end product we have an issue with, or just the perception of being misled? …cuz even if something isn’t “art” doesn’t mean it can’t have beauty or some other feature worthy of our attention. Another poster mentioned sunsets - those aren’t art, but we still admire the hell out of them.
My take on all of the above:
Don’t give a fuck if it’s technically art or not
If it’s presented in a dishonest way, I don’t like the post, and will downvote regardless of the content.
If the content looks cool, I can appreciate that in-and-of-itself; so, as long as the presentation isn’t misleading, I don’t mind it at all.