One google image search later…

Also of interest, door 3 has no handle, but maybe an occupied medallion.

the close faucet is casting two shadows, while the far sink is casting one.

The 3 is well to the right fo the door while the 2 is mostly centered.

While not conclusive, these are red flags for AI.

shit, how did i add lemmy on signal???

When CD burners first became affordable, I made mixes.

150 songs. I had a disk that started with pop, moved to metal, back to easy listening and ended with classical.

What does everyone do? Insert mp3-CD and hit shuffle.

Megadeath: Sweating Bullets -> Grieg In the Hall of the Mountain King -> MJ Smooth Criminal

IMO:

They’re gender-neutral. The two and three on the door are so that people can be told which one needs work.

Which ever one has the couches man, we need the couches.

Flawless opsec is a lot, but at least for now, it’s not how they are finding people.

It’s tips and borders at the moment. If it becomes police action as well you just have to make sure you’re not noticed by the police.

We’re probably not all that far off of papers please.

I agree to disagree, have a good one.

To gently disagree with you here: UI/UX work is absolutely not art,

UI without art is just a bunch of shitty buttons no one wants to press. Come to think of it, that’s one of the problems with Gimp. There is a UI, it’s just not a good one.

UX is arguably design. But most design departments would place UX as a mixed discipline.

scientific evidence as to how people see, perceive, and interact with things around them.

You’re describing Usability. This is, in fact, its own discipline that should direct both UX and UI.

The problem of poor UX in FLOSS can’t be attributed to a lack of talent; the fact is that FLOSS projects are not hospitable environments for designers, both technically and culturally.

That’s just saying it’s a lack of talent because FOSS teams are inhospitable. Blanket statements like that ring as a stereotype.

their expertise is often treated as a difference of creative opinion by developers who know nothing about basic design principles

The consumers of the product know nothing about basic design principles either. Does their opinion not matter either?

If FLOSS devs want usable interfaces (and I’m not convinced many of them do) this is the problem that needs to be solved.

So, forgive me if I’m reading too much between the lines, but what you’re saying here is if FLOSS wants better UI, they need to engage someone who says they’re an accomplished UI artist and blindly execute their vision even against their own impressions of the requested work?

Maybe there are reasons the FLOSS devs don’t want to sign up for that?

Off-Canvas Editing Paint tools can now automatically expand the width and height of a layer as you draw! You can select “Expand Layers” in the tool options to enable drawing past the current boundaries of layers.

More features such as guides and auto-expanding layers can be used to work in the off-canvas space!

SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Nothing is intuitive in that software.

UI/UX is a very very difficult job. I’ve only ever known a few UI/UX artists that were any good, and OMFG, are they expensive.

You can’t just drop everything and focus on something where you don’t have domain experts. Not to presume too much about you, but that would be like saying you need to drop everything you’re doing and focus on brain surgery next year. UI/UX is art. It’s a very specific type of art that, unfortunately, doesn’t come easy for people. There are companies for hire that work professionally on UX/UI, but they’re not cheap either. Anyone can spot bad UX, but knowing how to fix it in a way that works for everyone, that’s nearly a unicorn.

I’ve been using gimp since it was released for daily driver projects.

I’ve been using Photoshop for about a decade when required for gigs.

I can get around either app pretty decently at this point.

If you drop any new user into either, they’ll be absolutely lost.

If you drop a seasoned Photoshop user into GIMP, they’ll not only be lost but be unable to use their vast array of plugins and macros and aren’t quite (but non-technically are) impossible for the average user to work on.

We can’t make Gimp Photoshop-like. We can make strides to improve Gimp, but it’s beyond reach for the current team. Maybe we can start a crowdfund to get a UX company to take a stab at it, but even at that we’d need buy in from the developers and it would likely be an incredibly large rework, not unlike the current one that took quite a long time.

Communism isn’t bad, it just crumples as soon you put anything but saints in charge of it.

I’m not entirely sure anything works better in a long-term scenario though :)

Counter counterpoint: I don’t know, I think making an exception for tech companies probably gives a minor advantage to consumers at least.

You can still go to copilot and ask it for some pretty fucking off the wall python and bash, it’ll save you a good 20 minutes of writing something and it’ll already be documented and generally best practice.

Sure the tech companies are the one walking away with billions of dollars and it presumably hurts the content creators and copyright holders.

The problem is, feeding AI is not significantly different than feeding Google back in the day. You remember back when you could see cached versions of web pages. And hell their book scanning initiative to this day is super fucking useful.

If you look at how we teach and train artists. And then how those artists do their work. All digital art and most painting these days has reference art all over the place. AI is taking random noise and slowly making things look more like the reference art that’s not wholly different than what people are doing.

We’re training AI on every book that people can get their hands on, But that’s how we train people too.

I say that training an AI is not that different than training people, and the entire content of all the copyright they look at in their lives doesn’t get a chunk of the money when they write a book or paint something that looks like the style of Van Gogh. They’re even allowed to generate content for private companies or for sale.

What is different, is that the AI is very good at this and has machine levels of retention and abilities. And companies are poised to get rich off of the computational work. So I’m actually perfectly down with AI’s being trained on copyrighted materials as long as they can’t recite it directly and in whole, But I feel the models that are created using these techniques should also be in the public domain.

I’ve only ever lost one, I have six installed at home in 12 installed at work.

I’m not saying they’re the height of reliability but your mileage very well may vary.

Okay, I can work with this. Hey Altman you can train on anything that’s public domain, now go take those fuck ton of billions and fight the copyright laws to make public domain make sense again.

Yeah but unfortunately there’s a metric f*** ton of them using WhatsApp.

OK, Kudos to you. After your post, I looked up Tapas recipes, realized that I had enough on hand to make a few, and tested them on the fam. I managed to impress both the wife and the 7-year-old.

I assumed chorizo was Mexican, I’ve actually made that before.

I’ve had paella but it was on a cruise ship in the Caribbean.

I’ve heard of tapas but I’ve never actually seen it.

You know what’s strange. I can buy French cuisine, Mexican cuisine, Canadian cuisine, I can even find elements of UK in Germany

I’m not even aware that Spain has a cuisine. I just looked up the entry on Wikipedia and I’ve never seen any of those dishes really.

That’s just common knowledge, dealers never dip into their own product.