For what it's worth, I can confirm this comment works if you need to speak to someone: https://www.reddit.com/r/IRS/comments/1b6bisk/comment/ktarmz...
2,459 karma · joined March 19, 2010
I take generative art semi-seriously and have some cube like sketches https://www.instagram.com/p/B_Ix1yOH_2S/ and other simple line based sketches https://www.instagram.com/p/B9VsDrgHBQE/ but I think they are aesthetically nice either way and treat them as art.
For some context here is my "artist statement" as a generative artist:
From the outside, art is regarded as highbrow, intellectual, and “human”. Automation, however, is often perceived as rote, boring, and “robotic” by those who are non-technical.
As an engineer by trade, I see the act of automation as a much more creative process than the public gives it credit for.
In my artistic practice I try to bridge that gap by using software to automate the generation of unique art pieces in less than a fraction of a second. My hope is to elicit the same kind of emotions and reactions that viewers feel when viewing art that has been “generated” by hand, and help them consider automation as an art form and an act of creativity.
Whether acting as an artist, or engineer, I like to think of automation as my artistic medium.
I don't think there is one real error here as you put it, but it's been made public he was warned about him before and people he worked with would refuse to go to his properties when invited and told him why (citation: https://medium.com/@EthanZ/on-me-and-the-media-lab-715bfc707...).
Many companies do take up to 30 minutes especially if they are compiling a comprehensive portfolio (if the dispute is for thousands of dollars) and are outsourcing the representment.
In my experience consumers enjoy generative art, and are happy to buy generative work so long as its in a medium they are used to - such a as a print or plot - and are not interested in moving/digital screens.
Instead of picking a render and placing it for sale, show the buyers the software, show them the parameters and give them an option between a few renders to choose from. It makes it way more personal. People and popular culture are also much more tech savvy now and appreciative of elements of digital/internet culture.
This is just my opinion, but I believe many generative artists seem to put the algorithmic focus ahead of the aesthetic. From my experience if you treat the aesthetic as the primary objective and the technology as a tool it resonates better. Jared Tarbell and Manoloide both seem to do this, but have very different styles, and are by far my favorites in the space.
How does it work at your size now?
Some of the points an FB employee said about the situation around a week ago: "Well the ISPs are worse" "Imagine if it was them instead of us, we do a better job" "Net Neutrality is the real problem".
They think of everything as a PR problem unfortunately, and would rather go this route than dealing with the problems they have.
Although the media is currently focusing on Cambridge Analytica and the simple targeting they offer to ad buyers using likes/interests, the reality is that advanced buyers can buy/collect data elsewhere, chop and segment it as they please, upload names and email addresses, and have Facebook automatically match the data that they have with fairly high accuracy to users on Facebook.
This removes any of Facebook's "liability" in terms of targeting using likes and interests in their system, but still allows anyone with the data and know how to do as they please and still reach all the users they want using Facebook's tools.
Sure, Facebook will take a hit with this, but ultimately Facebook can and will get away with the current narrative that this was something that only happened years ago and they are better now.
To me, the current toolsets and targeting using your own uploaded data is what is even scarier. Facebook will just shirk all responsibility this way but still allow for the same thing to happen in the future.
In my opinion it's the absence of this topic from the article that makes YC look tone deaf once again by glossing over a serious repercussion that technology can have on society for the sake of self-promotion -- especially given current events regarding the manipulation of social networks by foreign entities and a very serious history of censorship and media control.
I see how this could easily be manipulated into an extremely powerful propaganda tool - especially hiding behind a guise of "algorithms" are doing all the work - and yet it is not mentioned at all in the post.
We have already seen how content systems like Facebook, Google, and Twitter can be manipulated via botnets, but when a central power manages this it can obviously get significantly worse.
Does this concern you as an investor who lives in America?
Initially we went with a similar membership concept, except people subscribed to one writer directly, and got access to the collective. It barely worked, and we moved over to more of a crowdfunding model which was about 100x more effective.
In the end we worked with major publications and hundreds of journalists, had a million dollar matching fund program, and paid out millions of dollars to writers directly, but it still didn't work as a big business.
This makes me think Medium is pretty clueless about what they are getting into - especially after raising more than $100 million.
http://blog.zmitri.com/studio/
open source: https://github.com/dmitric/studio
If you want to add some "shaders" would love to collaborate in some way.
We're sorry to see you go, {first_name}. We've marked your account to be deleted. Please bear in mind that we cannot recover your account after it has been deleted.
You can always create an account again in the future if you change your mind! You can do so by visiting get.uber.com.
Please don't hesitate to get in touch if you need anything else.
Obviously in reality, things are a lot more nuanced than 'always', but when your goal is to help as many companies at once, where the degree of experience varies, it often help to simplify the problem. In one-on-one situations, the partners can give you more personalized insights and in general are quite insightful.
As an international founder, the two things I took away in my batch were: 1) How to deal with visa issues - which can be gruelling + take time and money. That being said, just being associated with YC helps you out a lot. They can recommend great lawyers and alumni who've gone through similar experiences. 2) If you have a non-english sounding accent, pg is likely gonna scream at you when you try to pitch. It's kinda weird, but try not to let it get you down.
There's two ways to go about making it easier for immigrant founders to work legally in America: create a new startup visa class that is likely ridiculously nebulous, or increase the H1B cap. I think the second is much more likely to pass.