The title says “hundred” but then the article itself is giving examples that are the median salary in the US. These people are paying tens of thousands for match makers to “sift” through the 5% of men who meet their metrics

This fell a little flat for me. This seems like a case of someone having accidentally guided their algorithm to the most common denominator which typically leads to rage bait or sensationalism. I’ve seen just as much positive content about Korea as I have critical content. Furthermore neither seems extremely out of balance with similar content regarding other countries. But again maybe I interact with YouTube in a away the hasn’t pigeonholed me into some echo chamber or sensationalist algorithm. With the exception of maybe content regarding the US which skews more negative.

Friendly rebuttal. I don’t like this version either because of two reasons. First is that it is still using stolen material to do any of this “creative work”. Second: the knob twiddling, mixing colors, and all versions of that are integral to the creation process. Happy accidents are why we have a lot of what we have in the creative world. Somone chasing a specific sound might discover their own sound while twiddling away for hours. They will be able to do that in a much more replicable and modifyable way than the black box that is “AI”. But that’s just my opinion as an amature creative.

The 12 jurors are part of the same population that voted for trump. Are we really still surprised at an average group of people making nonsensical decisions…

Start with just one recipe. When I first was getting into cooking I was buying too much making it overwhelming to open the fridge and decide what to cook. As someone else mention shoot for having leftovers. One recipe scaled for 3-4 meals that you can split into containers and throw in the microwave when you are hungry.