m_f

Best guess is that the artist is a perfectionist and felt like it wasn't good enough for some reason. Most of the other ones he's taken down also don't seem like they were taken down due to being offensive.

There was some previous discussion here, though you should take the linked article with a grain of salt as someone pointed out that the author of the article isn't exactly neutral.

https://discuss.online/post/32799122

The tl;dr is that it's hard to say for sure. It certainly takes energy to run services like chatgpt, but how much energy it takes vs other things that people don't blink at like eating meat or watching netflix is unclear. It's also very entangled with a conversation about how backwards we are in energy generation. The energy cost of responding to any particular query is going down as models get more efficient, though that doesn't mean overall energy use will go down, see Jevons paradox:

In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological advancements make a resource more efficient to use (thereby reducing the amount needed for a single application); however, as the market cost of using the resource drops, if demand is highly price elastic, this results in overall quantity demanded increasing, causing total resource consumption to rise.

Man that's a great flex! Better than Fermat's "I have a proof but it's too large to fit in the margin", since it actually exists

Yeah, that would work better than the original. There's a few SRoMG along those lines:

From what I understand that's not really the mods' decision. Reddit was getting takedown notices from the copyright holder, which is unfortunate but not worth fighting. You can argue fair use, but Reddit doesn't care and the mods are just people that don't have fancy lawyers so here we are.

If you're up for submitting that as a regular post here, that'd be great! It's got strong SRoMG energy (which would probably also appreciate it), there's been some similar explorations:

https://discuss.online/post/22838639

That's actually pretty good for a modern Garfield. There have been some with literally no change other than the speech bubbles.

Some background on this comic:

Transcript:

Figure this one out: When I originally drew and submitted this cartoon, the ants were carrying an older man. That's it, everything else was identical. The cartoon came back to me, unused, with the words "no thanks" written across i from my editor.

I waited a few weeks, and then resubmitted the cartoon―only this time with a baby substituted for the man. And then they accepted it! I'm still scratching my head about that one.

Also, pretty sure those are supposed to be lips, not teeth. Think the colorist misinterpreted that.

For anyone else unfamiliar with the author:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Payson_Terhune

Albert Payson Terhune was an American writer, dog breeder, and journalist. He was popular for his novels relating the adventures of his beloved collies and as a breeder of collies at his Sunnybank Kennels, the lines of which still exist in today's Rough Collies.

Whoops, just realized I accidentally double-posted one image and missed this one, which might have been a bit confusing:

Makes sense, thanks for the background! Interesting to hear about Arne Beurling, not something you hear about nearly as much as Turing / Enigma machine