Classic Twitch.
Lmao, women are literally streaming in mini bikinis but VTubers must cover their fucking hips
Fuck Twitch and Amazon for their inhuman work conditions
A while ago I got hit in the recommended streams with a random stream of some girl with absolutely gigantic milkers in only bodypaint. Probably got away with it as some sort of ‘art’ project, despite the body paint being quite bad and she was practically doing nothing on stream at all, it was just simps throwing money at her for being on screen.
Other times there’s just girls in the ‘Just chatting’ category in tight spandex, leaving nothing to imagination, that are in suggestive poses and flaunting their gigantic tits and asses on screen. Also doing practically nothing but just posing and thanking donations.
Twitch really has weird ass rules when it comes to this shit.
Oh man, I hate it when that happens…
…I mean… you should probably share the streamer’s Twitch handle so we can all avoid seeing those kinds of videos, since that would be terrible to be forced to see something that terrible.
On one hand, I think that kind of shit is lame AF, but on the other hand if someone wanted pay me $200/hr to paint my hog green and vacuum in green Luigi hat, you know I’d be down
Luigi? That’s weird. What about Wario?
I’m not mad at the ladies gaming the system, I’m just mad at the system.
Twitch doesn’t want to get rid of it, it’s a huge moneymaker.
They just want plausible deniability to keep advertisers, sponsors, and regulatory bodies happy enough. That’s why the rules are so weird.
It’s the same with OnlyFans. It wasn’t even meant as a porn/sexual medium, but like well over 90% is probably just that.
I just don’t hope Twitch let’s it roam wild, they just need to man up and call it what it is, it’s porn and sexual content, give them their own category and keep them there.
Well, that’s kind of shitty. I know those models can run up to five figures, and if those rules aren’t enforced uniformly across the board for everyone then it does just seem like they’re targeting a particular class of creator.
As a side note, I find it funny that the article refers to then as “AI models” when no AI is typically involved.
Saying it’s AI even when it’s completely irrelevant makes it modern and cool though.
The technical definition of AI in academic settings is any system that can perform a task with relatively decent performance and do so on its own.
The field of AI is absolutely massive and includes super basic algorithms like Dijsktra’s Algorithm for finding the shortest path in a graph or network, even though a 100% optimal solution is NP-Complete, and does not yet have a solution that is solveable in polynomial time. Instead, AI algorithms use programmed heuristics to approximate optimal solutions, but it’s entirely possible that the path generated is in fact not optimal, which is why your GPS doesn’t always give you the guaranteed shortest path.
To help distinguish fields of research, we use extra qualifiers to narrow focus such as “classical AI” and “symbolic AI”. Even “Machine Learning” is too ambiguous, as it was originally a statistical process to finds trends in data or “statistical AI”. Ever used excel to find a line of best fit for a graph? That’s “machine learning”.
Albeit, “statistical AI” does accurately encompass all the AI systems people commonly think about like “neural AI” and “generative AI”. But without getting into more specific qualifiers, “Deep Learning” and “Transformers” are probably the best way to narrow down what most people think of when they here AI today.
Sir this is a Wendy’s.
