Recommended Posts

There's not even that much sex/nudity?!? It's certainly not just there for the point of it anyway. Compared to sparticus it's like sesame street pron wise and violence wise.

I really thought the scene with Joffry shuving that object up the ###### ass was awesome the way it really made you realise just how sick he really is.

Yeah if people think that the TV show is too graphic they clearly have not, nor should they read the book.

Yeah if people think that the TV show is too graphic they clearly have not, nor should they read the book.

Agreed. Having read the books I always find it comical when people complain about the unnecessary nudity as if the producers only added it to gain publicity. There's far more in the books than could ever be shown on TV.

As others have said, you also have to wonder about people who are disgusted by a bit of sex and nudity but will quite happily sit and watch the most pornographic violence.

What a show, latest episode was my favorite so far (the very beginning with the death and the very end with Daenerys' and Jorah's dialogue).

I just love how, despite it at the bottom being a fantasy soap opera for men, they keep the pacing so brilliant.

Renly's death, plenty of other shows would have probably milked that trying to build false sense of suspense and waste a good episode on it, here it's BAM! done, move over to the next thing).

Best thing on TV.

Anyway, just finished with the first book, started the second. I got a few things spoiled by the internet/some people who read it, and I figure it's for the best to read the books as soon as possible and learn those things myself. It's stuff like that gif above that will always make the show great as well :)

Um, what just happened at the end of episode 7? I'm confused...

He charred up some children.. I haven't read the books, so I'm just guessing it's the 2 orphan kids they were talking about to try and strike fear into the people at Winterfell

tumblr_m3zwz0wKnQ1rp2zn0o1_r1_500.gif

EDIT:

Just saw this on reddit (minor spoiler):

http://i.imgur.com/otXjw.jpg

That's details on a level that rare shows care for (Breaking Bad comes to mind). And I know it's a book so it's not really hard to plant stuff like this for later use, but it's awesome nonetheless.

tumblr_m3zwz0wKnQ1rp2zn0o1_r1_500.gif

EDIT:

Just saw this on reddit (minor spoiler):

http://i.imgur.com/otXjw.jpg

That's details on a level that rare shows care for (Breaking Bad comes to mind). And I know it's a book so it's not really hard to plant stuff like this for later use, but it's awesome nonetheless.

Right, it really has nothing to do with the 'show'. Both of those conversations were lifted directly from the books. Although, the images are little misleading. He didn't kill Ser Barristan as it seems to imply. Selmy is the old knight in the bottom two left pictures that was forced off the Kingsguard in Book1/Season1. You'll see him again.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • >defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool It is not. It is the inhuman artist replacement. The human writing the prompt is the employer/manager requesting the work product of the artist -- a supervisory/descriptive job that doesn't carry with it any rights to the copyright of that work product at all. And since AI is not human itself, it can't gain copyright for anything it is asked to regurgitate or hallucinate, so it can't transfer that copyright to the employer/manager/human who asked for the output. This was all legally reaffirmed last year. So, no, while there are AI tools, AI slopware generation is NOT a "tool" in the legal definition of that word.
    • As long as i get to play GTA 6 before it ends 😂😂
    • Google is opening the world's first AI museum in Los Angeles by Ivan Jenic Image via: Google Ever since AI image generators went mainstream, the debate over whether AI-generated art is real art hasn't let up. Those who don’t consider AI to be art say that if a machine does the creating and anyone can prompt it, there’s no skill involved, and therefore no art is produced. The counter-argument is equally persistent, as defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool, and that every major technological breakthrough, like the camera or the computer, was met with the same skepticism before eventually being accepted as a legitimate creative medium. Google’s position in this debate is clear. Which is no surprise, as the company is investing billions in AI infrastructure. And now, in efforts to encourage people to use its AI even more, Google is opening Dataland on June 20, which it's calling the world's first AI arts museum. Located inside The Grand LA, a Frank Gehry-designed building in Los Angeles, the museum spans 25,000 square feet. The museum is built around a collaboration with media artist Refik Anadol, who has worked with Google since 2016. The inaugural exhibition is called Machine Dreams: Rainforest, and is powered by an AI model trained on “an extensive dataset of the natural world.” It generates 1.2 billion pixels of visuals in real time and reacts to visitors dynamically. The space also generates soundscapes, real-time emotion sensing, and algorithmically produced scents. Image via: Refik Anadol Studio / Google Google says that the museum is powered by its Gemini models, which run on Google Cloud. So, everything is generated inside one of Google’s AI data centers and is streamed to the museum. Alongside the museum opening, Google Arts & Culture is funding an AI Artist Residency, giving four artists $25,000 grants each, along with mentorship from Refik Anadol Studio and access to Google's machine learning tools. Their work will be shown at Dataland and on the Google Arts & Culture website later this year. Google’s AI museum will undoubtedly initiate a fired-up debate on social media, and we can’t wait to see the first reactions. Via: Smithsonian Magazine
    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      178
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!