all 62 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 99 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"Home thinking kills the AI industry."

"You wouldn't imagine a pair of juicy titties."

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 56 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Watts are power not energy. It can be done with 12W it will just take longer.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    The unit is correct. You can think about tits for as long as you want, and the human brain uses less power while doing so. Here's some improved wording:

    The human brain uses 12W while it thinks about tities whereas AI doing the same thing uses 2.7 GW.

    The major change was from "to" to "while", and I would argue that those words can actually mean the same thing:

    "A person uses 100W to ride a bicycle" means the same thing as "A person uses 100 watts while riding a bicycle.

    So, I would conclude that the meme is fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Not to be pedantic or pro ai, but what about the people who cannot visualize in their heads? It's a real condition.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 73 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I damn, I never thought of that... You know what, I am just going to sit here and think about tits for the next ten minutes just for my bros who can't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Aphantasia would be the name. I mostly never have images that I can see in my mind, sometimes I get quick flashes, but that's about it really. I didn't realize for the longest time that not everyone is like me and that only about 1-4% of people have aphantasia.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    so my brain is a machine that turns calories into mental images of hella fat tiddies but not a GODDAMN DROP OF SERATONIN

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If huge bombin' gnorks don't wring a drop of serotonin outta ya, then your soul has the problem, not the boob machine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Huge Bombin' Gnorks would make a great band name.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago
    [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    Giggity-Watts

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I mean fuck AI but that's clearly a made up number. The amount of energy used during training maybe? But not running a model.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I get its a meme, but like, an AI would absolutely not use that much power to imagine some fat perky tits. Honestly they probably make up so much of the training data that it'd be the easiest thing for an AI to "imagine"

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    you can check out some training databases on hugging face, and there is 100s of gibs of porn there. it is one of the best ways to understand human antomy for image/video gen

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So a quick google says it uses 70 millivolts.

    Which means the human brain has a metric fuckton of amperage (probably explains the heat)

    285 Amps.

    To safely carry that current you need 95mm2 of copper wire.

    9.5cm X 9.5cm

    So cubed, because 2d doesn't make sense is approximately 1000cm3

    The human brain is 1300cm3

    That means the human brain is just one fat copper wire

    It's a shame we can't up the voltage a little bit and save on brain size

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    And so much faster than AI too. As soon as I finished reading the word "tits", there they were, motorboating my mind's eye.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    "Have you know?" sounds like something a drunk AI would write

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Bro... just don't gove big tech company idea, you want them to stealing brain from grave ?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    The greatest graphics card: imagination.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    but computers can calculate a 9857408293304297*3729892093829/3809389312893382 in less than 10 ms using microwatts of energy, and humans would need a solid hours (at best minutes i presume)

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Out of curiosity, how many watts did my brain just consume contemplating the nose, flavor profile, mouth feel, food pairing selection, and post-dining cordial choices of said titties?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can’t consume watts. Perhaps you meant Joules or Watt-hours?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    This is such a silly technical argument that I've seen twice now in this thread. Watts is just Joules/second. It's entirely valid to wonder "what rate am I 'consuming' energy when I do X" rather than ask "how much energy did I 'consume' when I do X"

    Making this correction is similar to telling someone that asking how fast they moved is wrong, and they should only ask how far they moved.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment