Oh damn, that’s some high quality irony right there.
I didn’t say you meant wizard.
What I said would be more akin to “you can care about trans people and enjoy wizards”. Do you see the difference?
Notice how I’m saying “your analogy is wrong”, not “this is what you said”.
It’s really difficult to believe you when you say you understood what I was saying when your takeaway was more about AI than about art. Or when you liken my point to a common anti-gun regulation slogan when I’ve been specifically saying we should regulate them?
You know what? Let’s use guns as a direct swap. You’re arguing that guns are antithetical to art, and that no self respecting artist would use a gun in their artwork. I’m saying that guns should obviously be regulated and people shouldn’t do bad things with them, but that saying they make something not art is foolish.
You actually really haven’t explained your thoughts on the matter. You’ve several times said that you won’t but adamantly insisted you were right. You also seem to ignore anything that’s contrary to the argument you want me to be making, which is another little glob of fun in the “deliberate misunderstanding” irony train.
You haven’t convinced me you understand your thoughts or where they came from. I’m more convinced than ever that you’re just upset to be disagreed with and can’t handle not getting someone else’s argument. You’ve been railing either against something I don’t think, or against actual technical details of how something works.
Oh damn, that’s some high quality irony right there.
I didn’t say you meant wizard.
Notice how I’m saying “your analogy is wrong”, not “this is what you said”.
It’s really difficult to believe you when you say you understood what I was saying when your takeaway was more about AI than about art. Or when you liken my point to a common anti-gun regulation slogan when I’ve been specifically saying we should regulate them?
You know what? Let’s use guns as a direct swap. You’re arguing that guns are antithetical to art, and that no self respecting artist would use a gun in their artwork. I’m saying that guns should obviously be regulated and people shouldn’t do bad things with them, but that saying they make something not art is foolish.
You actually really haven’t explained your thoughts on the matter. You’ve several times said that you won’t but adamantly insisted you were right. You also seem to ignore anything that’s contrary to the argument you want me to be making, which is another little glob of fun in the “deliberate misunderstanding” irony train.
You haven’t convinced me you understand your thoughts or where they came from. I’m more convinced than ever that you’re just upset to be disagreed with and can’t handle not getting someone else’s argument. You’ve been railing either against something I don’t think, or against actual technical details of how something works.