moomeecore

[moomeecore]

new item unlocked!

[moomeecore]

personally, i think theres a correct answer

[moomeecore]

his swagless mental breakdowns this, his homoerotic patterns of grief that. what about HER grief-stricken moments of extremely poor decisionmaking? what about HER incredibly alarming isolation and trauma-driven life choices?!?!?!

[moomeecore]

having a job w 8 hour shifts moodboard

[moomeecore]

reminder about my pony website

[moomeecore]

colored pencil g3s... i watercolored over these but cant find the photos i took and am too lazy to take more. oops

[moomeecore]

florina tart custom!

[moomeecore]

cats

[moomeecore]

i hgate everythingh

speaking of the enviorment we need to get madder at hotels. working at a hotel and seeing the amount of waste produced??? CRAZY. the one i work at only recycles cardboard, and everything else gets thrown, because they didn't want to spend the money on getting recycling picked up? there should be a law against that. apparently there's a law that they can't re-serve food a second day in a row for health reasons which idk is probably reasonable, but guess what happens then? they make me throw it away and i want to kill myself the whole time. they used to let the employees take what they wanted from it before making me toss it out but now they're worried abt wasting money on disposable dishware, so they stopped doing that. they said you can take some home in a take out container, but you can't use theres because it would get this. "create too much waste" . run that by me again? anyway im gonna try to find a homeless shelter that's willing to take the extra food. my boss said that upper management probably won't agree to that because then employee time (and therfore Money) would be spent on packing the food up, but this astonishes me, because they aren't harsh on people "slacking off". so much time is "wasted" by employees here. they can't spare the time to pack up some boxes? we need some laws abt this istg

[moomeecore]

speaking of the enviorment we need to get madder at hotels. working at a hotel and seeing the amount of waste produced??? CRAZY. the one i work at only recycles cardboard, and everything else gets thrown, because they didn't want to spend the money on getting recycling picked up? there should be a law against that. apparently there's a law that they can't re-serve food a second day in a row for health reasons which idk is probably reasonable, but guess what happens then? they make me throw it away and i want to kill myself the whole time. they used to let the employees take what they wanted from it before making me toss it out but now they're worried abt wasting money on disposable dishware, so they stopped doing that. they said you can take some home in a take out container, but you can't use theres because it would get this. "create too much waste" . run that by me again? anyway im gonna try to find a homeless shelter that's willing to take the extra food. my boss said that upper management probably won't agree to that because then employee time (and therfore Money) would be spent on packing the food up, but this astonishes me, because they aren't harsh on people "slacking off". so much time is "wasted" by employees here. they can't spare the time to pack up some boxes? we need some laws abt this istg

[moomeecore]

"why are you upset the stupid machine at the coffee shop near your work prints out a receipt even if you say no receipt and then the person at the counter just has to crumple it and toss it rendering the function useless (????) when you litterally draw things on paper!!!!"

so. thinking about that post again. it's so annoying as someone who's Big Life Mission is enviormental activism. pulling the "you must not have cared abt the enviorment before, you just want to use it as an excuse to dunk on something you already hate" thing ughhh. probably true for some people but jesus christ it's so presumptious. and it's so fucking annoying because it's like. dude enviromental activism is all about weighing the pros and cons between a bunch of different options that all hurt the enviorment. most things people do are bad for the enviorment. but if you don't accept that sometimes they need to do them, or sometimes they want to do them too much for any progress to be made by abandoning them completely, what do you do? you become an ecofascist. because if you can't accept that there's a whole slew of reasons from perfectly understandable to reasonable to self comforting to downright stupid that people do things that hurt the enviorment, and that the goal is to find the things people can do without and remove or improve them, and instead you think it's only a competition of which things have the worst impact, with no consideration of physical needs or *emotional reasonings* behind them, you're left wanting to wipe out the human race, or put every single person in the world in an anarchist commune, which, nothing against anarchist communes, but it's not gonna work for everybody. "why are you upset about ai when you've been ok with digital art this whole time" misses a vital point which is that digital art has the capacity to be an important driver of small scale economy (ie, regular ass people getting money for actual work they put in, not big corporations and not corporation dick sucking scammers), culture and emotional connection. ai "art" is used for cheap profit for people who can't be bothered, to "save money" for corporations so they don't hire people, and for people who want to only ever receive direct gratification without consideration of where that comes from. it is the ultimate form of fast food slop "content creation not art". and it's NEW. the current access of everyday people to generative ai, it's NEW. they just plopped down a NEW thing that's bad for the enviorment, that's even more soulless and derivative than everything before it. it's not bad to point out that the soullesness and derivative nature is part of why it's worth fighting against. everything is bad for the enviorment all the time. but the easiest things to get rid of are the things that don't fucking matter, and that most people don't even like. you gotta get rid of the useless bullshit first, even if the important stuff could potentially be doing worse things. because we are in a dire situation and everything helps, but trying to find a better way to do digital art while still keeping everybody mostly happy is a difficult task to undergo. nipping generative ai in the bud before people become dependent on it, when it is the epitemy of a luxury nobody needs (even if you think actual art is an needed luxury, id hope to dear god youd understand why this is even more so), is more realistic and a lot more urgent and topical. we've had digital art for over a decade, and we can work on making it more sustainable, sure! but nothing makes you sound more like a "art isn't real, it's all just content" moron like actually, genunley acting as if digital art and generative ai are equally evil, and nothing makes you sound less like you know shit abt the enviorment like acting like the moral and social contexts surrounding them are irrelevant to solving either problem, and to weighing their impact.

[moomeecore]

so. thinking about that post again. it's so annoying as someone who's Big Life Mission is enviormental activism. pulling the "you must not have cared abt the enviorment before, you just want to use it as an excuse to dunk on something you already hate" thing ughhh. probably true for some people but jesus christ it's so presumptious. and it's so fucking annoying because it's like. dude enviromental activism is all about weighing the pros and cons between a bunch of different options that all hurt the enviorment. most things people do are bad for the enviorment. but if you don't accept that sometimes they need to do them, or sometimes they want to do them too much for any progress to be made by abandoning them completely, what do you do? you become an ecofascist. because if you can't accept that there's a whole slew of reasons from perfectly understandable to reasonable to self comforting to downright stupid that people do things that hurt the enviorment, and that the goal is to find the things people can do without and remove or improve them, and instead you think it's only a competition of which things have the worst impact, with no consideration of physical needs or *emotional reasonings* behind them, you're left wanting to wipe out the human race, or put every single person in the world in an anarchist commune, which, nothing against anarchist communes, but it's not gonna work for everybody. "why are you upset about ai when you've been ok with digital art this whole time" misses a vital point which is that digital art has the capacity to be an important driver of small scale economy (ie, regular ass people getting money for actual work they put in, not big corporations and not corporation dick sucking scammers), culture and emotional connection. ai "art" is used for cheap profit for people who can't be bothered, to "save money" for corporations so they don't hire people, and for people who want to only ever receive direct gratification without consideration of where that comes from. it is the ultimate form of fast food slop "content creation not art". and it's NEW. the current access of everyday people to generative ai, it's NEW. they just plopped down a NEW thing that's bad for the enviorment, that's even more soulless and derivative than everything before it. it's not bad to point out that the soullesness and derivative nature is part of why it's worth fighting against. everything is bad for the enviorment all the time. but the easiest things to get rid of are the things that don't fucking matter, and that most people don't even like. you gotta get rid of the useless bullshit first, even if the important stuff could potentially be doing worse things. because we are in a dire situation and everything helps, but trying to find a better way to do digital art while still keeping everybody mostly happy is a difficult task to undergo. nipping generative ai in the bud before people become dependent on it, when it is the epitemy of a luxury nobody needs (even if you think actual art is an needed luxury, id hope to dear god youd understand why this is even more so), is more realistic and a lot more urgent and topical. we've had digital art for over a decade, and we can work on making it more sustainable, sure! but nothing makes you sound more like a "art isn't real, it's all just content" moron like actually, genunley acting as if digital art and generative ai are equally evil, and nothing makes you sound less like you know shit abt the enviorment like acting like the moral and social contexts surrounding them are irrelevant to solving either problem, and to weighing their impact.

[moomeecore]

that has to be one of the most "yet you participate in society" ass posts I've seen like Okay way to project

yeah lol. sick of "oh you think this thing is bad for the enviorment? well what about everything else? why aren't you doing nothing ever?" least productive way to go about anything oh my god. its like...have you never heard of weighing the pros and cons? that poster (in the comments) insists that using ai is less enviormentally taxing than digital art, because people spend only a few seconds generating ai, and hours working on digital art. interestingly enough, though, one of those things has a potential to do something good for the world, the other does not. also kinda wild that they're including Basic Ass Digital Art Programs in this, not just large scale cgi animation projects. like at that point its just like "why do you use the internet/electricity?" you can't critique ai if you use social media or like. lamps. apparently

[moomeecore]

people who say pseudo pro generative ai stuff and defend it as "im just bringing reality to your reactionary takes" are so fucking annoying. the whole demonizing of people who bring up the soullnessness and lack of intergrity as a reason that its bad. girl part of the discussion just IS about philosophy. it's about what is or isn't art, what is or isn't human, what is or isn't creation. and these are normal ass debates academics have been having for centuries. you sound like a conservative "you can never bring up a point that has an emotional or philosophical or subjective or abstract component". im not saying nobody's ever reactionary abt ai, but like. bringing up these debates and these issues as actual real points dosent make someone a reactionary. you can in fact sit down and think and do your best to detach emotionally from personal experiences and think and think and still come up with a conclusion on a philosophical issue. you can't just be like "it's not worth talking abt if it's philosophical". as if philosophy and concepts like "what does it mean to be human/alive" have never guided society in positive directions. yeah make it all about pwning the newbs with your Facts And Logic with no consideration for artistry as a culture and field and no consideration for more subjective debates as worthwhile in any conversation ever ever

[moomeecore]

head in my hands. i hate this post so fuckint much

[moomeecore]

0/10

Rate my gaming setup

[moomeecore]

rate my gaming setup