And the way we move on from that is by each of us, individually, deciding that's not an attack on manhood.

Only because we associate sexuality and "getting laid" with manhood. They aren't the same. Are asexual men less men? No one's gatekeeping manhood in this image, they're gatekeeping sexuality.

Hmm. Normally I'd be inclined to agree, but this really doesn't feel like it's punching at men or manliness. It's more just saying no one will find you attractive if you have a cybertruck. And we all know you can be a man as well as completely unfuckable at the same time.

The fact that you think the only thing you're doing is entering a prompt says enough. There's faaaaaaaar more to the process than simply prompting. You clearly don't want to engage with anything other than the strawman you have in your head, so you have fun with that.

AI generated art is fundamentally different from printing a reproduction of something that exists 1:1. I'm not interested in going on depth on a technical discussion on AI, anyway. I'd rather discuss the philosophy.

As far as the role of man versus machine, using AI as a tool is more like being a director or composer. You determine the composition. The setting. The subject. The style. Let the machine do the labor of simply outputting, and then you tell it what you don't like about this output.back and forth, until you arrive at whatever finished is. It's as much art as a conductor in a symphony, or a director on a set, simply giving direction to a machine.

The issue that people have, or should have, with AI isn't with AI art, it's with it being shoe horned into everything that can make a buck. Open source generative AI running on my own machine has allowed me to express myself in ways I never could before. The point of art is expression, and regardless of the tools used to create, that output is still an expression of me. More people should have access to tools to express themselves, in whatever way they can.

Art has always been limited by access. Either to the tools, or to the ability to learn and practice. AI, at least in its current form, with open source models readily available, is only allowing more people to create who never could before. Getting into any art is expensive, both in money and time. Anyone with a half decent rig can get something set up and add a touch of art to their world, and begin to express themselves in SOME way.

That probably wasn't the target audience of the article. It was probably people who were more likely to know Excalibur than Durendal.

They're more seen at older businesses that have been there forever. Newer ones get newer signs, with more flashy displays.

Any country with controlled airspace will have some initialism brigade with something to say about it.

Here in Portugal, most display useful info like date, time, outside temperature (with varying degrees of accuracy),

We have ones like this in the states too. My favorite near me is at a church. It cycles between temp and date, but the display has too few characters, so instead of just being two screens, date then temp, it's 3 - day and month, a second screen that just says "/24" and then the temp.

Honestly, was probably Britain stealing it for a museum.

The point is that Excalibur is well known and Durendal isnt. They want eyes, and so make the article headline reference something everyone knows, then educate in the article body.