Once again, you are proving that evidence for authorship is required. If not, then you would not be demanding my prompt. You did it again.
Your logic is simple:
When you assert authorship, assertion is enough.
When Vegas asserts an AI test, assertion is not enough.
When Pink Floyd sells an 8-track, we rely on labels, records, publishers, and evidence.
So your rule is basically: “Evidence is required for everyone except me." Very rigorous. Almost post-doc.
Blackvegetable » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ No...
I pointed out that you're a coward and an imbecile.
Nod.
Your logic is simple:
When you assert authorship, assertion is enough.
When Vegas asserts an AI test, assertion is not enough.
When Pink Floyd sells an 8-track, we rely on labels, records, publishers, and evidence.
So your rule is basically: “Evidence is required for everyone except me." Very rigorous. Almost post-doc.
How do you know that the 8-track is Pink Floyd?
So I have to prove authorship?
Your logic is simple:
When you assert authorship, assertion is enough.
When Vegas asserts an AI test, assertion is not enough.
When Pink Floyd sells an 8-track, we rely on labels, records, publishers, and evidence.
So your rule is basically: “Evidence is required for everyone except me." Very rigorous. Almost post-doc.
Blackvegetable » Today, 7:38 pm » wrote: ↑ Would you like to see some of the other dumb **** you think?
Not that I care, but did AI talk about me at all? I mean, did it bring me up?Blackvegetable » Today, 7:08 pm » wrote: ↑ We have submitted samples to AI for neutral judgment.
It didn't go well for you.
Only in the context of Toxic Homosexuality.Cannonpointer » Yesterday, 9:10 pm » wrote: ↑ Not that I care, but did AI talk about me at all? I mean, did it bring me up?
Would you like to see yourself disagree?DeezerShoove » Yesterday, 9:07 pm » wrote: ↑ You care. I don't.
I post **** with an inflection purposely. Haven't you realized that yet?
Purposely.
Meaning: Having a purpose.
Many times it's simply a trigger. You enjoy being triggered from what I can see.
You're very welcome (I am assuming you were going to thank me).
No.Vegas » Yesterday, 7:47 pm » wrote: ↑ So I have to prove authorship?
1. Same ****. Continue to prove me right.
DeezerShoove » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Sure. Why not?
So far, I feel like I'm explaining "wet" to a goldfish.
DeezerShoove
Whatta **** tool.
![]()
Do you ever really say anything, non-person?
The bitch implies a lot of **** without proof…IOW, the imp-liesVegas » Yesterday, 7:14 pm » wrote: ↑ Actually, you never submitted any samples of mine. You claimed AI judged your sample, which you refuse to prove was your work. The only sample I submitted was the one below proving that you can manipulate AI to say anything.
You were absolutely destroyed. Remember this?
My elementary level paragraph:
Here is AI's analysis with my biased prompt:
QED. You are done.
Excellent. You want the prompt because otherwise I am merely asserting it.Correct. Now apply that to yourself.You claimed authorship. Unless you provide evidence, you are not showing it. You are asserting it.
Then he says this:
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom you’re such a prick…DeezerShoove » Yesterday, 9:07 pm » wrote: ↑ You care. I don't.
I post **** with an inflection purposely. Haven't you realized that yet?
Purposely.
Meaning: Having a purpose.
Many times it's simply a trigger. You enjoy being triggered from what I can see.
You're very welcome (I am assuming you were going to thank me).
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom Have you found any evidence that AI used facial recognition to identify Sweet Donnie as Roy Cohn's sex toy?
I tried once.. Sole's girlfriend could not compute.Blackvegetable » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Have you found any evidence that AI used facial recognition to identify Sweet Donnie as Roy Cohn's sex toy?
Hold on a minute - I smell a DQ.Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 7:08 pm » wrote: ↑ We have submitted samples to AI for neutral judgment.
It didn't go well for you.
So... it's interested...
That is exactly what you are asking for.