|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Big Toe
77
« on: September 01, 2023, 05:03 »
As far as I see an extended licence allows the user to use your image on things like T-Shirts,mugs etc.
Supposing they buy an extended licence from Adobe Stock,can my image still be on sale with the other stock sites too or does an extended licence mean that you grant for example Adobe Stock exclusivity?
Extended licences have nothing to do with exclusivity. They just give the customer more right to use in a calendar, or as you said on a T-Shirt and some agencies require extended licences for higher print runs (or least they used to do). So unless the image is exclusive in the first place, for example because you are exclusive at iStock or have exclusive images at Stocksy or some other agency, you can continue to sell the image elsewhere. Sometimes you here about buyout sales, where you get a lot more money and then have to remove the image from all agencies, but in that case, the agencies usually reach out to the contributor with an offer made by a customer, which the contributor can then accept or decline.
78
« on: August 31, 2023, 14:58 »
Some locations - oil refineries, factories, research labs, outer space - are hard to access for stock photographs.
Outer space is another area, where you probably won't get very authentic images with AI, but where I could imagine a large demand for fantasy images, for example impressive space nebulae, or planets with two moons and stuff like that for science fiction stories.
79
« on: August 31, 2023, 14:43 »
Given that reviewers can't be expected to know the innards of a whole variety of factories or industrial processes either, I'd argue that points towards disallowing this type of content altogether
What kind of content specifically do you want to ban? Pictures from inside factories? Or everything where it is hard to get access? I think it is a general problem that the AI pictures do not show the reality, but some fantasy that may or may not have some resemblance to reality. It is just more obvious in some cases, but I am not sure that it is possible to pin point the areas where the deviations are particularly problematic, beyond the existing rules that AI pictures should not show specific places or specific brands. AI pictures are probably generally unusable to illustrate newspaper articles or anything else where some level of authenticity is required. If an agency wants to allow AI content at all, they should make very clear, which images are AI generated lest some customer mistakes them for the real thing. If you ban specific content like the inside of factories, then where would you stop? Someone in this forum reported experimenting with AI generated underwater scenes, with the AI just inventing species, so you would have to ban that content, too. On the other hand, some people may not care about specific species and are just looking for some fantasy underwater world. So it is problably better to make sure that the customer can tell the fantasy from the realtity instead of banning the fantasy.
80
« on: August 29, 2023, 14:43 »
...
No worries. Buyers will fix them to make them make sense. At least these are not copyright/trademark violations. Reviewer AI clearly cant distinguish 6 fingers, 3 arms, 3 legs and other weird images.
and, nitpicking, but this unsupported staircase, is possible - while scary i've used such in Turkey & India
An unsupported staircase may be possible, however, in this case, the transition between the lower part and the higher part does not seem right. The devil is in the details.
81
« on: August 18, 2023, 02:56 »
One thing for certain in my experience is that it has never ever gone down like this before. Especially with what I know is coming.
What is coming? When?
What is already here is the second season of Star Trek: Strange New Worlds. A very good season again and a must-see for anyone interested in aliens. The last episode aired just last week. Unfortunately, it ended on a cliff hanger and due to the actors and writers strike, it may be quite a while until the third season is coming.
82
« on: August 13, 2023, 14:28 »
So, thanks to the Democrats and the Germans, the war in Ukraine continues.
Yes, indeed. Without their support for the Ukraine, Putin would problaby hosting a victory parade in Kyiv by now.
83
« on: August 10, 2023, 19:04 »
My point was about exports to Kyrgyzstan and Armenia and to countries that are in the custom union with russia.
In this case, the same embargo applied to russia must be applied to these countries too, unless they choose to break away from this union. It's a simple, logical, and straightforward solution.
You are diverting the focus toward other cases. Is this another form of #whataboutism? "Yes, you talk about cheating through Kyrgystan, but #whatabout cheating through China"? 
Anyway... let me fall for that.
I agree, it is more complicated, but if there is political will, this cheating can be stopped too. Germany and the EU have all the legal tools needed to prevent German and EU companies to export specific goods ending up in russia, through all 3rd countries acting as a proxy.
Even if there are legal loopholes, if there is political will, these loopholes can be closed.
This has nothing to do with whataboutism, it is just a question of whether stopping trade the former Sowjet Republics will close the loopholes or not and I tried to explain why I think it will not close. It also doesn't matter, whether those countries are in a customs union with Russia or not. Russia can just as easily import stuff through other countries, as long as they don't have implemented the same sanctions as th EU and the USA. We are not talking weapons or other restricted material here, after all.
84
« on: August 09, 2023, 20:00 »
And it will not help to disallow exports to Kyrgyzstan & Co, as Russia then will just use other countries. Or do you suggest that we should also disallow exports to China, India and Turkey?
Ceasing all exports to the former Sowjet republics may also proof to be counter productive as it will make them dependent on Russia and their allys.
The German government has all the tools needed to stop this from happening.
Here is an extract from the German Export regulations:
6. Restrictions
...
When exporting to a third country, however, it should be noted that not all countries may be exported due to embargoes.
A distinction is made between
- arms embargo
- partial embargo
- Total embargo.
The total embargo prohibits all economic transactions with the affected state ...
I don't think the German government was stupid and didn't know what was going on. I instead believe that they closed their eyes until some Reuters journalist analyzed the stats and broke the news, triggering the German Finance Minster to say:
"The circumvention of sanctions against Russia is unacceptable,"
It's sad and hypocritical, but better late than never if there is political will and actions will follow words...
Could you please answer my question, whether you suggest that Germany or the EU should stop all exports to countries like China, India or Turkey? Because that would be needed to stop the Russians from importing stuff via proxy.
85
« on: August 09, 2023, 18:46 »
These exports are to be stopped without question
That's what matters. Thanks! 👏
Do you have a suggestion how that should be done?
Yes... All governments are granting export licenses to companies under their jurisdiction.
The German government and the EU should disallow exports to Kyrgyzstan & Co, and take action against the cheating companies.
For most transactions, you do not need an export license. At least that is the case in the USA: https://www.trade.gov/export-licensesAnd I do not think that it is different in the EU. And it will not help to disallow exports to Kyrgyzstan & Co, as Russia then will just use other countries. Or do you suggest that we should also disallow exports to China, India and Turkey? Ceasing all exports to the former Sowjet republics may also proof to be counter productive as it will make them dependent on Russia and their allys.
86
« on: August 09, 2023, 16:09 »
These exports are to be stopped without question
That's what matters. Thanks! 👏
Do you have a suggestion how that should be done?
87
« on: August 09, 2023, 15:39 »
The problem does not lie exclusively in Germany
Yes, obviously. But two wrongs don't make a right.
#whatabout Italy doesn't justify anything.
I showed Germany not only because it was part of this discussion, but mainly because it's the biggest EU economy.
One would expect Germany to be an example. 
It is just not so easy to stop it. A lot of countries have not implemented the same sanctions against Russia as the EU and the USA have, even very important countries like China, India or Turkey. German exports to Turkey have also increased significantly, so the Russians very likely are using them as a proxy to buy stuff, too. The increase is just not so big in percentage, as there was far more trade between Germany and Turkey then between Germany and for example Kyrgyzstan to begin with. So even if we would cut ties with the former Sowjet republics altogether, Russia would just use other countries to import stuff. As long as it is not stuff that is tightly controlled anyway, like weapons or high end computer chips or the machines to produce them, there is really little chance to fully stop this.
88
« on: August 07, 2023, 09:18 »
Germany does not fulfill its promises on the supply of weapons to Ukraine. Germany continues the policy of the Kremlin agent Merkel?
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article246721222/Unterstuetzung-fuer-Ukraine-Trotz-grosser-Versprechen-Deutschland-zoegert-weiter-bei-Waffenlieferungen.html
This article if rife with errors and inaccuracies and highly misleading. It is about a package of weapons and other supplies that were promised in May, but have not yet been delivered in full. But it is totally normal that it takes some time to prepare the deliveries, for a number of reasons. For example the IRIS-T SLM system mentioned have not yet been delivered, because they do not exist yet, because they have to be produced first. It is a new system which Germany does not even in operation itself yet. Two of those system have already been delivered to the Ukraine in earlier packages, though. It was never intended or communicated that those system would be delivered immediately, as it was always clear that they have to be produced first. So no promise was broken. The Leopard I tanks mentioned have to be checked and in many cases probably repaired by the defence industry, as they are probably tanks that have not been used for years. See also the following article for a fact check on the article in the Welt: https://deaidua.medium.com/fact-check-welt-de-despite-big-promises-3fc3dd37d39b"Conclusion How do you write a conclusion to an article like that? Personally, I am having a hard time finding the right words right now. It is full of errors, taken out of context and important key information is not mentioned. This results in the reader being given a completely false picture of the German military support to Ukraine."
89
« on: August 07, 2023, 09:02 »
The villagerrs had been attacked by 7 foot tall aliens wearing some sort of silver suit and ... floating ... along on some sort of small silver disk with red lights coming from it. Despite being shot repeatedly although being knocked down they soon got back up. They took a teenage girl hostage when cornered and cut her throat. As more villagers arrived they attempted to capture one and they chased them through the forest but they escaped in their craft. This has been happening for a few nights.
So those aliens travel at least dozens, probably hundreds or even thousands of light-years and then have nothing better to do than to harass and kill a few villagers in South America? I have heard better cover stories for crimes actually commited by humans.
90
« on: August 02, 2023, 10:58 »
And I know that we cannot directly perceive the whole reality, as for example we can only perceive electro-magnetic radiation of certain wave lengths, but from what I understand, this is not what he means and he rejects also what we can measure with scientific instruments as reality.
Whatever you measure with scientific instruments and the instruments themselves are filtered through the screen of our perceptions. Scientific instruments didn't exist at the beginning of evolution. By the time we invented them, evolution had already given us the virtual reality headset or the desktop interface as he calls it. So, the instruments we create are part of that interface, and do not exist outside of it. You can measure aspects of the perceived reality, but the act of measurement will be a perception in itself. Evolution showed us only the categories of things important for our survival. Anything else is hidden.
That's what I meant. As long as you believe in stuff like that, we have no common ground, as we live in different realities. It is difficult to build instruments for aspects of reality that you can't perceive.
It is not that hard to build an instrument that can detect X-rays. Or an instrument that can receive radio waves. They are called radios and have been quite popular since their invention.
91
« on: August 02, 2023, 10:04 »
I'd rather attend a meeting of the Flat Earth Society than deal with that nonsense.
In other words, in the absence of arguments, you resort to insults.
I feel free to call out obvious nonsense and I'm not inclined to get in an argument about his guys notions, because if you reject the concept of reality itself, then we have no common ground and any argument is futile.
Where does he reject the concept of reality? Hoffman never did it.
It is even in the title of one of his books: "The case against reality" You just assume that your perceptions are the reality. And he has evidence and a mathematical model supporting that it doesn't have to be the case.
There is a reality beyond the perceptions, but the perceptions are not an accurate image of the reality.
You can have mathematical models about everything. It does not means that they have anything to do with realtity. And I know that we cannot directly perceive the whole reality, as for example we can only perceive electro-magnetic radiation of certain wave lengths, but from what I understand, this is not what he means and he rejects also what we can measure with scientific instruments as reality.
92
« on: August 02, 2023, 09:42 »
I'd rather attend a meeting of the Flat Earth Society than deal with that nonsense.
In other words, in the absence of arguments, you resort to insults.
I feel free to call out obvious nonsense and I'm not inclined to get in an argument about his guys notions, because if you reject the concept of reality itself, then we have no common ground and any argument is futile.
93
« on: August 02, 2023, 07:50 »
You can theorize about loopholess in the theory of relativity all you want, but I don't think they exist and in the end it is just wishful thinking that there may be any, much less loopholes that make it feasible for an object the size of a star ship to exceed the speed of light and that without using forces that would destroy the starship and kill the travellers.
Imagine explaining to people living 500 years ago the idea of a plane, made of heavy steel, taking onboard hundreds of people and flying them to the other side of the world within hours. They would say similar things to you: "it is not possible, it is insane, only birds and insects can fly because they are lightweight etc." That idea would be beyond their paradigms. And there you have people like Leonardo da Vinci, who thought flying machines were possible. He could conceive things beyond the current paradigms. Most likely, he failed to build a working flying machine, not to mention something like a modern plane, but he was right about the idea of flying in a machine. He was a visionary, even if his contemporaries would laugh at some of his ideas.
This is not at all comparable. 500 years ago people had basically no knowledge at of phyiscs as we understand it.
Since we began to really accumulate scientific knowledge, new knowledge was in most cases incremental, not really fundamentally replacing old knowledge, at least not basic knowledge like how things move. Relativity did not significantly change our understanding about how things move at non-relativistic speeds and quantum mechanics did not change how macroscopic objects behave. It is very unlikely that future discoveries will change the fact that object with rest mass cannot reach or exceed the speed of light.
It is outrageously arrogant to reject the possibility of any significant paradigm shifts. A classic Plato's Cave attitude...
I did not reject the possibility of significant paradigm shifts at all. Relativity was a paradigm shift, but it did not change how we calculate the speed of cars or the focres that drive them. Quantum mechanics was a paradigm shift, but it did not change our understandig how macroscopic objects behave. There will be likely be further paradigm shifts. For example. the standard model of particle physic has far too many unexplained constants to be the last word and quantum mechanics and gravitation have yet to be unified. The theories that will answer that will change our understanding of the universe, but it is still very unlikely that they will allow objects with rest mass to reach or exceed the speed of light. Please note that I wrote "very unlikely", not "completely impossible". Perhaps science will surprise us all, but for the time being, I cannot take seriously any notion that relies on star ships exceeding the speed of light. Unless it takes place in a fictional universe. We only started to accumulate knowledge that can explain a tiny part of the wider reality that evolution has made accessible to us. Beyond that, we don't know much. The model of metaphysical materialism can never explain how certain configurations of atoms gain self-awareness or perceive qualia. That is the end of the road for materialism.
Just watch some interviews with Donald Hoffman or read stuff published by the scientists from the Essentia Foundation to realize how deep the rabbit hole goes.
I'd rather attend a meeting of the Flat Earth Society than deal with that nonsense.
94
« on: August 02, 2023, 06:30 »
You can theorize about loopholess in the theory of relativity all you want, but I don't think they exist and in the end it is just wishful thinking that there may be any, much less loopholes that make it feasible for an object the size of a star ship to exceed the speed of light and that without using forces that would destroy the starship and kill the travellers.
Imagine explaining to people living 500 years ago the idea of a plane, made of heavy steel, taking onboard hundreds of people and flying them to the other side of the world within hours. They would say similar things to you: "it is not possible, it is insane, only birds and insects can fly because they are lightweight etc." That idea would be beyond their paradigms. And there you have people like Leonardo da Vinci, who thought flying machines were possible. He could conceive things beyond the current paradigms. Most likely, he failed to build a working flying machine, not to mention something like a modern plane, but he was right about the idea of flying in a machine. He was a visionary, even if his contemporaries would laugh at some of his ideas.
This is not at all comparable. 500 years ago people had basically no knowledge at of phyiscs as we understand it. Since we began to really accumulate scientific knowledge, new knowledge was in most cases incremental, not really fundamentally replacing old knowledge, at least not basic knowledge like how things move. Relativity did not significantly change our understanding about how things move at non-relativistic speeds and quantum mechanics did not change how macroscopic objects behave. It is very unlikely that future discoveries will change the fact that object with rest mass cannot reach or exceed the speed of light.
95
« on: August 02, 2023, 06:20 »
Perpetual motion machines - planets?
Planets are not perpetual motion machines. They lose energy when they do work like sending out gravitons or creating tidal forces.
96
« on: July 28, 2023, 13:18 »
The car that I bought, and was advertised as a shiny car driving to smooth city traffic against flashy buildings, while reality is more like getting stuck in shabby neighborhoods.
...
After all, on every advertisement there's a small notice: real product might differ from advertised product.
Most people understand that they buy just the car, not the neigbourhood. However, if the picture of the car they order looks like a Porsche and what they get looks more like a Volkswagen, they might get cranky.
97
« on: July 28, 2023, 05:40 »
No, I do not. Inspriration by Star Trek is fine. However, I cannot take the Alcubierre drive particularly serious since it requires the existence of exotic matter or other forms of negative energy fields and even if they would be found, you would still have to produce them in large quantaties, which is unlikely to be feasible.
It is one thing to theorize about the theoretical possibility of such a drive and another to consider it as a pratical solution to the problem of interstellar travel, even for alien civilisations.
Yeah, at the moment it is certainly not feasible, no question about it. But that's not the point. The point is that you can think of loopholes in the theory of relativity. You don't violate any existing laws, and still reach the destination faster than light. Alcubierre drive is just one example of a loophole. It is conceivable that an advanced civilization has come up with other, possibly better loopholes including such that they can implement and use.
Well, it looks like we have a fundamentally different view of physics. I am convinced that there are some general laws of physics that will never be broken. There cannot be a temperature below zero degree Kelvin, there cannot be a perpetual motion machine, two solid objects cannot occupy the same space, you cannot travel back in time and no particle or object with rest mass can reach or even exceed the speed of light. You can theorize about loopholess in the theory of relativity all you want, but I don't think they exist and in the end it is just wishful thinking that there may be any, much less loopholes that make it feasible for an object the size of a star ship to exceed the speed of light and that without using forces that would destroy the starship and kill the travellers. Now I may be wrong about that, but until I have been proven wrong, I think it is far more likely that the people who say they saw alien star ships misinterpret what they saw or misremember or lie or are delusional. After all, we know that people do those things all the time. So in my opinion, it is a far more likely explanation for what those people say then that we are completely wrong about the laws of physics.
98
« on: July 27, 2023, 18:08 »
An Alcubierre drives is a kind of warp drive, from what I have read. I never thought I would say that, but: Have you been watching too much Star Trek?
Are you ridiculing the theoretical work of a serious physicist, just because it happens to have been inspired by Star Trek? Then go back to the books of Jules Verne and see how science-fiction can sometimes anticipate future technological advancements. Of course, people without imagination will never invent anything.
No, I do not. Inspriration by Star Trek is fine. However, I cannot take the Alcubierre drive particularly serious since it requires the existence of exotic matter or other forms of negative energy fields and even if they would be found, you would still have to produce them in large quantaties, which is unlikely to be feasible. It is one thing to theorize about the theoretical possibility of such a drive and another to consider it as a pratical solution to the problem of interstellar travel, even for alien civilisations.
99
« on: July 27, 2023, 17:19 »
But then, according to the non-denialists, they just hang around here for decades (or some people believe even for centuries or millenia) without making formal contact and sometimes get seen by some people and sometimes they lose an aircraft for whatever reason and don't seem to be able to retrieve it before the US government seizes it, inspite of their advanced technology.
1. The "losses" may very well be intentional. For example, an intelligence test for "wild primates" on this planet. Humans conduct similar tests with mirrors placed in jungles and forests. Or to cause certain developments on Earth, kind of like the monolith in Space Odyssey 2001.
2. The craft may be some cheap drones that they don't care about.
They can't judge our intelligence from our level of technology and by following our media outlets and reading our scientific papers? Those aliens don't seem to be very intelligent.
100
« on: July 27, 2023, 17:15 »
With the current technology, it would take us more than 50.000 years to reach the nearest solar system, Proxima Centauri, which probably does not have a plant with life. Even with far more advanced technology the voyage would very likely take at least a numer of decades, if not centuries.
1. "The current technology" is the key word here. And that "current technology" is only a few generations ahead of the bicycle... In the grand scheme of things, it is probably incredibly primitive.
I already alllowed for huge advancements in technology. But even Scotty can't change the laws of physics. 2. Einstein's physics superseded Newtonian physics. It is conceivable that for sufficiently advanced beings, Einsteinian physics is below kindergarten level, metaphorically speaking.
It should be noted that for most pratical purposes you can still use the Newtonian equations. You only have to consider relativity when the speed gets really fast or the results need to be extremely accurate. It is very likely that it will be the same with whatever theories might one day replace Einsteins theories. So it will very likely still not be possible for particles with rest mass to exceed or even reach the speed of light. 3. Even within Einsteinian physics, due to time dilation, time flows much more slowly for beings inside a fast-moving craft. Even if they can "only approach" the speed of light, not much time would pass inside the craft even if it has travelled for thousands of light years. From the perspective of a photon travelling at the speed of light, no time has elapsed even after the photon has travelled for billions of light years. For the photon, it happens instantly.
You need to have a speed that approaches light speed really close for that to become of relevance. In order to accelerate particles with rest mass to that speed, you need really huge amounts of energy. CERN uses as much electricity as a city of 290.000 people and that is just to accelerate a few protons and electrons to that speed. Imagine the energy you would need to bring a star ship to that speed. Also, we don't know anything about their lifespans. Maybe they just send drones, von Neumann's probes or whatever.
Maybe they have working Alcubierre drives. And Alcubierre drive is just one proposed loophole allowing to effectively reach the destination faster than light. Maybe there are other loopholes.
An Alcubierre drives is a kind of warp drive, from what I have read. I never thought I would say that, but: Have you been watching too much Star Trek? 4. If they can operate in at least one more dimension than us (string theory proposes 11 dimensions), then they could instantly reach any point in our 4D spacetime. Our 4D spacetime would be like Flatland to them.
The additonal dimensions are wrapped up at quantum level, though. You cannot travel in them. 5. Watch some videos with Professor Donald Hoffman to understand why spacetime is not fundamental. It is conceivable that super highly-developed entities do not even travel THROUGH spacetime. This could potentially explain some of the "woo" things about the phenomenon.
The perception of 3 spatial dimensions and 1 temporal dimension is what evolution gave us. It is not absolute and it is not fundamental. It was the minimum required for our survival as a species. Hoffman has showed evidence that evolution hid the rest of reality from our perception.
That does not sound like something I would be interested in watching.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
