You have no idea how lucky we are this nigga croaked before he could sully his legacy with AI slop boosterism
>>220373228How do you know it wasn't AI slop that made him lose the will to keep going
>>220373228He literally remastered inland empire with ai upscaling lmao
*made his legacy better.
>>220373228This tard has a legacy? Since when?
>>220373790since he supported black lives matterhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lPMs4qsdsTc&ra=m
>>220373790His only legacy is being a wholesome chungus redditor.
>>220373574Yeah, but that's a small footnote. With a few more years, he would've fully fallen into the AI boomer rabbithole a la Dawkins
>>220373228Get Real
Lynchiantroons in TEARS
>>220373790>>220373842Unironically kill yourself
>the director who mandated what screens and screen sizes you should use to watch his movie would use AI slopYou can't read the room can you
>>220374355Uhh, Anon...? >>220374231
I'm sure he would have experimented with it. I'm also sure he'd pretty soon realized how limited it actually is and put it aside as the novelty it is. The guy liked technology he could fiddle with and I understand why he was interested in AI but I don't reckon his interest would have lasted.
He totally embraced the internet, and interactive media, some of which I’m not sure can exist today. The interweb has been destroyed by web 2.0 coders and ad pushers.
>>220374132It’s sad how unprepared some of these people are for this. You wouldn’t expect Dawkins to be this susceptible
>>220373228That evil jew piece of shit made evil garbage and the world would be better if he died decades earlier Kill yourself
Lynch was instrumental in the push to SoV and digital. He loved the Internet and technology. He even used AI upscaling on the Criterion Inland Empire. He’d have definitely played with it more and likely managed to actually do something quite interesting with it. Your romanticised version of him is incorrect and you’d be much better served by a purist like Tarantino.
Like any genuine artist, we was a pragmatic.
why do retards get so hysterical about AI media generation? if you can't possibly envision any way in which a talented artist might use a tool that can do things better than existing tools, you're the one that has been mindraped, not him>bbbbbut slop!yeah moron, almost anything created by humans is complete trash. have you never looked at deviantart before?
>>220376763>He even used AI upscaling on the Criterion Inland Empire.which looks like absolute dogshit
>>220374231based and commonsensepilled
>>220374231>>220375429>>220378118I don't trust 'Natasha'
>>220378090>why do retards get so hysterical about AI media generation?My primary problem with it is the environmental impact before anything else. That, and how it can and has been used for propaganda. But also>If you can't possibly envision any way in which a talented artist might use a tool that can do things better than existing tools, I have yet to see any evidence for that. Faster? Probably. Cheaper? Definitely, that's why it's being pushed so hard. But better? I have seen nothing to suggest as much.
>>220378670why are you pretending that faster and cheaper can never ever ever be in the same camp as better? doing things faster and cheaper allows you to do more of them, saving time and money that can be utilised elsewhere. it's the difference between a typewriter and a word processorits dogmatic and simply silly to hold that nobody, no matter how creative or talented, could ever use any machine learning software to enhance their work in even the slightest way
