That’s why I ask for one I can’t for nearly into that category of “brain does this to ease itself of discomfort”

Right, but what I’m trying to say is that it’s not possible to give you one. You have built for yourself a theory that is not falsifiable; every example you might be given will be reinterpreted through the lens of pain, and so it will reaffirm your ideas—because you have designed it to.

Imagine someone wearing purple-tinted glasses while asking people to show them something that wasn’t purple-colored. It can’t be done.

This is more or less why I was asking about what value this idea has for you, what it teaches you about the world. If this idea, that literally all comedy is about processing pain, means something, it leads to some conclusion, then it becomes falsifiable. Right now you’re just offering it as a kind of truism.

Yeah, but… I wouldn’t describe a roller coaster as “painful.”

Like, I understand the connection you’re making, but I really have to stretch my words to get there.

I just, I think you’ve found a frame to better understand the world through, and you’re applying it to everything, even when it might not really make sense to. You’re using the concept of “pain” as if it were a fundamental atom of the universe.

It would sort of be like describing an orange as “painful” because the flavor of an orange includes acids.

To be clear im not saying “all jokes therefore are fine […]

I’m not accusing you of anything, don’t worry.

Everything is greater commentary on the world. Every bit of knowledge you gain is a puzzle piece that fits into a broader picture.

I can understand your pain idea, but only if I stretch it out to mean a particular kind of expectation and subversion—which is how I actually understand comedy. That is, surprise is an important element of how jokes work. But I imagine that you’re interpreting the unexpected to be some form of pain: that there is some connection between the expected and normalcy, and the unexpected and discomfort.

I don’t find the unexpected to be discomforting, which I think may be the root as to why we disagree.

I don’t like “bad puns” at all because I think they’re lazy.

I’ve heard good ones, though. Clever ones.

Also, tangentially and as an art appreciator, the feeling of disgust is plenty enjoyable in the same way that horror is. By feeling something, and then looking inward to understand those feelings, you learn something about yourself and about the world. I pulled myself out of transphobia—the “but could I date one, though” kind—by trying really hard to understand where that disgust was coming from. Turns out I didn’t need it. :p

Have you ever audible laughed at the talent of a pun

…Yes.

I didn’t say this in my other comment because I wasn’t sure how to explain it, but you know that “bad puns” are just one particular genre of pun, right?

I mean, I think you’re likely to describe them all as painful regardless. “It is painful that two definitions of a word are not easily reconciled,” or something.

Can I ask you something? I mean sincerely, like I’m trying to understand you as a person. Why do you think this pain model of comedy is useful? You’re describing pain that is so miniscule and modest, but pointing at it nevertheless, insisting that it is pain and thus justifies what you’re saying—what is this revealing to you about the world?

pain is the vulgarity of the joke teller and the feeling of disgust it causes.

I feel like you’re really fitting this horse to a suit you’ve made.

My man, if you could not find anyone who liked Kevin Spacey’s work, then there’d be no one to say he was any good—it’s a self-answering question.

What if majority opinion is decided by emotional manipulation by those with the most money

It is, they’re currently burning the world down for fun, and I don’t like it.

People don’t like Kevin Spacey very much. I dunno, seems like that’s already been decided.

I am aware that you’ve only ever seen the word “morally” in Mein Kampf, apparently.

If you hate AI slop comments you should also hate human slop comments at least to a degree.

I’m not buying into the false equivalency. I dislike both, I guess, but I hate AI way more. Which is deserved because AI is waaay worse.

This is one application where the primitive verbal intelligence of AI could be useful as a tool because it can be broadly applied. To raise the bar.

You mean by avoiding it? Great, we’re already doing that. I’m already doing that. You should have no problems with me because we are, hand in hand, “raising the bar.”

You are aware that you can like something that also makes you uncomfortable, yes?

Always being argued with by people who have no idea what I’m talking about.

Artists need to create something new with or despite the new tools if they want to stay relevant.

Logistically? Maybe. But morally? Like, eat shit, man.

https:// .youtube.com/@ChloeVSHistory

Ew.

If enough people collectively decide that AI art is art, then it kind of is. That’s the nature of social constructs.

I reject this. Loudly and with purpose. Art is not art without a conscience to speak it, to make it. This is half descriptive, half declarative. I have no desire to cede any ground to these solipsistic, inhuman, vampire people.

The mere idea that your wife could be replaced with a rubber doll if it were made convincing enough is… fucking absurd, and worthy of the most extreme contempt imaginable.

After like 2 years of arguing with AI dipshits, the conclusion I’ve come to (and it’s not really that novel) is that art is as any other language, like English, or body language, and I mean that literally, like body language, and its value is in whether you like listening to the person speaking.

This goes for SpongeBob, Dune, The Lord of the Rings, Reservoir Dogs, “Epic Fart Sounds 10 Hours” on Youtube, and any child’s crayon, stick-figure drawing of their own house.

If an image can’t be distinguished from what AI produces, isn’t it obviously slop too and not art either?

I can’t distinguish AlteredEgo’s comment from AI, so I think it may just be slop by default. Yeah. Unfortunately, he has nothing interesting to say—I’ve literally heard these exact words from like a hundred other places, so… I guess he’s just not worth talking to. What a boring guy. Really an NPC, if I’ve ever seen one.

Try to be more original, Ego. Originality, yeah. Then I think you might be worth listening to.

No, those would be people in the second. Snake oil drinkers and astrologists.

Elon Musk is the world’s best programmer. Ah! He makes so much money! 🤑

You disagree that women are socially pressured into being more apologetic and agreeable?

You may as well tell me an apple doesn’t fall when you let it go.

A refusal to acknowledge social trends is actually a very sexist (or homophobic, or racist) position to hold because it is a de facto defense of the status quo.

A person cannot hope to change society for the better while refusing to see society for what it is.

I do think the fact that the US is the only dissenting voice is incredibly funny.

Turns out, there is more than 1.5 billion people in Africa.

But these are facts I can learn independently of its, you know, appearance on a map. And outside of this being a notable news story, I don’t really see it prompting any such questions.

so it’s not a question of making people feel better about the size of their country

It is, though. That’s actually the only purpose this serves.

I think you might read that as dismissive, but I see some value in making people feel better. Certainly in making the US feel worse.

I don’t, however, think that this will meaningfully improve anything.

Russia doesn’t really have this problem anyway, it’s very large in all our popular projections.

It’s area should still be incorrect, though, yes? Which would mean we have incorrect ideas about its natural resources, its farmland, its cultural cohesion?