Chebucto Regional Softball Club

Do we need to bust out the [Brennan speech](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4DSZo96HEik) again?

The greatest enemy ever created is the albino red dragon.

I swear to god, this bard slander is getting out of hand. You had such an easy druid joke laid out for you...

I wanna run an adventure where a dragon secretly runs a bank, and nobody can tell because it acts exactly like every other banker.

In law enforcement hell, they have to testify against someone they falsely arrested to a fair and reasonable judge, and every lie they try to tell manifests as physical black sludge that sears their throat as they speak. ...Fuck, I'm gonna have to come up with a new one shot now.

This is the exact reason I learned to play the ukulele

Okay, this campaign is gonna be a dark and sinister urban adventure, so law enforcement is corrupt and doing evil things. Okay, this is a swashbuckling tale, a la Robin Hood against the Sheriff of Nottingham, so law enforcement is corrupt and doing evil things. Okay, this is basically a noir detective style adventure, so law enforcement is corrupt and doing evil things. Okay, I noticed I keep making law enforcement evil, so I'm gonna do a one shot set in hell. There's no civilisation or human NPCs, so law enforcement isn't even here. The year is 1312...

Eh, not really a wine guy, personally.

"Yo, you brought snacks? Awesome! What'd you bring?" "Fish sandwiches." "I... Um... Thanks, Jesus... Anything to drink?" "My blood."

A reminder: Bards can cast Healing Word, while Paladins can use Lay On Hands.

Which bit of the spear, though? Cause a spear is just a staff with a pointy bit on the top, so if you've got the pointy bit, then it's just a spear. If not, you've got a staff.

[Here is a good visual representation of this.](https://youtu.be/lod_LUp3ggc)

How is that confusing to you? A hammer is a tool, and a hammer does not replace a carpenter. Tools do not replace creatives. Logically following, since AI is used to replace creatives, AI is not used like a tool. > How else could you use generative AI, except to generate a thing for you? You seem to think this is a point in gen AI's favour. > You cannot kvetch about this replacing all artists forever and still insist it’s a flash in the pan. You're right. Which is why I didn't say forever. People are using it to replace artists, and it's going to die off soon. Those are not contradictory. > It plainly serves a desirable purpose. False. *Making* art is desirable. *Having* art is only desirable if you like the art, and AI images make me nauseous (not hyperbole). Nausea is not desirable. If you think having is better than making, you aren't a creative. > That alone makes comparisons to NFTs as spurious as those dolts insisting ‘people doubted the internet.’ People did doubt the internet. We have articles. But people also massively over-hyped the internet, leading to the dot com bubble. I think comparing a tech bubble to a tech bubble is a fair comparison, especially since it's the same people peddling a new brand of snake oil.

That was pretty great. Morgan Webb immediately pulled out $5.

If they're gonna act persecuted anyway, why not persecute them? A thief might have a persecution complex, but they're still a thief, so you arrest them for theft.

"AI is just a tool" is not how anyone uses AI. They treat AI like a free employee who will do the work for them. Note how people don't say it replaces a paintbrush, but that it replaces a commissioned artist. "AI is not going away" is just a lie, making it seem inevitable so you stop fighting it. Just like how bitcoin is going to revolutionise currency, and now NFTs are the future. I see complete justification in banning the garbage output from the world-burning nazi-built plagiarism machine.