I’m gonna go ahead and feel threatened.

I love that opening this I can immediately tell that it’s not AI generated, and not just because everyone’s got reasonable proportions and numbers of parts, and the face can handle being split by that line while still retaining its structure.

It’s obvious because there’s composition, negative space that’s not crammed with prompt-maximising guff. There’s a focus, deliberate lines of action implying tension and intention. It’s five heroes with the eye at the centre of their motion, with a godlike being looming ominously over them. The eye is red which is reflected in the looming figure’s eyes, implying a connection between them.

I have no idea about the story here, I’ve never seen it before, but I can glean that much just from the design. This is what art is, it tells a story or expresses something. This is why it matters that someone made it on purpose.

Are SCUBA and cave exploration not dangerous enough for you? Why not do both, at the same time, at even deeper depths! Hear the call of the void louder and clearer than ever!

According to this there are about 91 different definitions of league throughout human history, so I thought the most reasonable way to deal with your question was to calculate them all:

Vizzini was very clear that the most famous is “never get involved in a land war in Asia”.

You can with a sub-wavelength antenna like a nintendo joycon has, it’s less than 10mm in X and Y axes. It will just have terrible reception, like a nintendo joycon has.

Also it could be a higher frequency which would allow a smaller antenna.

Her eyes and mouth are slightly wider than a relaxed expression, so there’s visible tension. In video it could be cute, like she might just be happy, but if you freeze just that one moment then her expression is ambiguous. Either she’s talking and smiling enthusiastically, or she’s about to eat you enthusiastically, or more realistically she’s afraid and trying to hide it. Add the creepy text and you’re primed to interpret the expression negatively.

Words are objects in a sense, although they are abstract, but there is no singular objective language in the same way that there is no objective gender. Both are intersubjective, they are interactions negotiated between subjects. There is no fixed object that you can point to and call “language” independent of a subjective experience of that language.

And your argument could be applied to expressions of gender. A feminine dress is an object, and a beard is an object. These are gender signifiers, but that doesn’t make gender itself objective in any way. The analogy to language is very close. They are both sets of signifiers.

It does change all the time, and dictionaries don’t ensure any kind of standard. The linguists who write dictionaries will tell you that their only function is to describe the most popular parts of the language, not to prescribe any particular rules. Telling people how they should speak doesn’t actually work.

I could say the phrase “abso-fucking-lutely” and you understand it, even though it’s not in the dictionary. That’s still language, it’s still English.

And I don’t know what you mean by a “‘hard’ contradiction” or why that matters. My point is that both language and gender are forms of communication that rely on socially constructed signifiers and they are both fluid to a similar degree, so the analogy is good. If you want to argue with me, that’s the point you should be dealing with.

Language isn’t objective though. It wasn’t handed down from some deity.

Language is a constantly evolving negotiation of new and remixed communications, performed through billions of interactions every single day. It’s collaborative and unpredictable and sometimes someone comes up with something cool and the next day everybody is copying them.

In short, language is socially constructed.

I think it’s a great analogy for gender in that respect.

It’s Buddy the Christ.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Buddy_christ.jpg

Men can lactate, specifically when they are severely malnourished, but I have heard it’s possible to induce it in various ways. This would aid the survival of a tribe when food was scarce by keeping the babies alive for longer, but some mammals can do it under normal circumstances as well.

deleted by creator

Oh wow, I never heard of this but I love Knytt Underground by the same developer. You also play as a bouncing ball at least for part of it.

Had to downvote, but the game is great. I play it with my kids and it is reliably hilarious. There are so many interactions that something surprising happens with amazing regularity.

This is all potentially true.

I would be very happy to provide an alternative face.

women are not your enemy and are not even theoretically automatable

I also just learned of it.

That sounds very realistic to me.