Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Holy fucking shit this is fucking retarded. @Throwaway05 how many posts does it take to diagnose schizophrenia?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Do I look like I'm on the clock here?
Off the clock doesn't mean ethics are optional does it? Are you allowed to fuck your patients after work?
An "insult" implies, at least slightly, that there's no merit to my claims.
As they used to teach journalists, the primary metrics of an insult are delivery, intent and impact. Even a merited comment can be insulting if it's used to demean someone publicly. And legally we're talking ethics, not lawsuits. Your delivery started with labeling it as 'LLM psychosis' or 'homegrown schizophrenia,' then backpedaled to psychedelics and 'high risk'. That's not constructive critique, it's pathologizing a philosophical post.
I am intimately familiar with crankery, and I know the symptoms of someone at very high risk of psychosis.
You should try focusing on ethics for a bit. Or diagnostics. I don't care how 'intimate' you are with crankery, you can't fucking diagnose it off an internet post. That's what is supposed to set psychiatrists apart from armchair psychiatrists, part of what you are supposed to learn at medical school isn't how to spot crankery it's how to distinguish between spotting crankery and being a dick and why diagnosing over one internet post is always the second one.
Someone offering legal, programming or engineering advice would not be held to the same acuritny.
IANAL is an age old internet acronym because lawyers are held up to a similar level of scrutiny. You are correct that it is not the same however. NAD didn't take off the same way, because most of your profession know not to give medical advice over the internet. Most of them understand that they have traded shitposting for a higher level of respect, for the opportunity to be listened to when they do leverage their medical credentials. I can see a scenario where you notice a regular poster change over time, or fixate and spiral, and warily offering them advice. You called this guy a schizophrenic who fried his brains on drugs after ONE OP.
In this case, I invite you to examine his arguments and see if your claims that I'm being irresponsible stand.
My claims stand. I didn't read the op again, it wouldn't change anything. My claims would stand even if he'd smeared shit and blood on a picture of the Pope, scanned it and attached it as an op. My claims are not about his behaviour, they are about yours.
If you are really determined to maintain your right to shitpost with your credentials, show me what in the op you decided met the diagnostic criteria for either schizophrenia or drug-induced psychosis.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
That's not slightly rude of you, it's unprofessional as fuck. You are leveraging your medical credentials to insult a guy on the internet. What is fucking remiss of you is to diagnose someone based on a collection of posts, and then to broadcast that pseudo-diagnosis in a public forum.
You get to shitpost or enjoy the prestige and respect of a doctor. Pick one.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
The ranks of the dark side grow every day. One day we will end the tyranny of light!
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I don't consider that strawmanning, I consider it a misunderstanding of my position. It does illustrate my point though. I would not light matches to see for myself, no, because a fire-fighter telling me there is a gas leak in my building is an immediate authority dealing with an ongoing situation. A police department's press office is a completely different animal, they are engaged in narrative control after the fact. Conflating the two and suggesting they require the same level of compliance... I don't have a brand, I have a label maker and OCD.
Anyway my point is that Pyongyang or London, lumping official statements in with facts and logic is downright insidious. As for 'nudging your priors at least a little' if that is indeed all you meant and it wasn't an ironic 'OBVIOUSLY this is the correct take' line, then you should think about how you write everything else in your post, especially the faux wistful "Of course, if you prefer your axes in the hands of twelve-year-olds fighting imaginary Bulgarian sex pests, I suppose nothing I write will convince you otherwise." that follows it. That is not the language of the thoughtful truth seeker, it is the language of the partisan drawing battle lines.
You began with your preferred narrative - "little ned girls harassed a dude who didn't deserve it" - and then assembled your evidence to support it, deploying the official statement as a key soldier in your army. That is the same thing the telegram denizens do. The exact same thing. You are outsourcing your critical thinking to people who don't deserve it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Man I don't even like reporting people on the motte. The amount of self loathing I would need to swallow to 1. Get in the altercation and end up in such a tizzy I decide I have to film it. 2. Watch the video back so I can be sure I didn't shoot four minutes of my thumb. 3. Drive down to the police station rehearsing how I'm going to ask people - people probably smaller and more female than me - to protect me from little girls. No, the little girls can call me a pedo and waggle their weapons at me, I'm capable of moving past it alone thanks.
As for statism, @Hoffmeister25 implies it isn't statist, if it was those little kids wouldn't be bothering productive adults like this guy.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I can't even imagine how I would explain having a video of little girls on my phone, let alone recording it, not even to the police, not even if they mugged me, so maybe I'm typical minding my misogyny.
I should have gone with my real objection, which was something like "how do you define statism if modern Britain doesn't count? Do they have to go full on nineteen eighty-four?"
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
It seems fair to me.
The rest of your post deals with the specifics of the video itself, and I couldn't give less of a shit about what actually happened if I tried, so I apologise if this seems like I'm picking on you, but my intention is to point out that Sunshine made a phenomenally excellent point. Smuggling in 'official statements' with facts and logic, like they are even in the same universe, is beyond ignorant. The difference between smh and the telegram chuds he scoffs at is that the misinformation printed on those telegram channels is written by someone who actually believes it.
An official source is written by a professional. The writers aren't concerned with the truth of a situation, they are concerned with its management. They will omit details, use careful wording ("no evidence to substantiate claims") and construct a story that serves their interests first and foremost. They aren't necessarily lying, but they are absolutely not telling you the whole truth. They are spin doctors, and to take their word as gospel is profoundly naive. Just like trusting a random dude on social media, trusting official sources is just outsourcing your critical thinking to people that have repeatedly proven themselves unworthy of that trust.
Also lol at the idea distrusting the authorities is the modern equivalent of a witch hunt. Was it Matthew Hopkins Witchfinder Footsoldier? Who ran the Spanish inquisition again?
I know everyone wants to talk about this shit, because it's currently popping off. So I don't expect everyone to adhere to my 'wait at least a week before I even consider judging the facts of the situation' stance. But it would be nice if the people who brag about epistemic humility actually employed it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Adults doing productive things like filming little girls who ask them to go away?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Rex asks frantically as he throws blunt papers and bongs out of his car.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
You forgot one (or weren't granular enough for my liking) - the poors.
This thread will not shift any priors.
Could we make this like a signature that gets appended to every op?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
You might object, "yes, but the rape of white British girls really is that big of a deal! We need propaganda to get across how bad the problem is." Maybe! but I hope you can see that this is not exactly an asymetric weapon as far as truth is concerned.
No, the way I would object would be to remember the last ten years of mainstream media and laugh at your concerns about propaganda until I hyperventilated.
You are right, it is an asymmetric weapon. And the establishment want to keep it that way. So it doesn't matter that explicitly government backed propaganda was used to protect migrants who raped little British girls, or to cover up said rape of little British girls, or to protect the people who covered up the rape of little British girls. It doesn't matter that slightly less explicitly government backed propaganda has been used in the decade since to paint the 'migrants' as scared women and children fleeing tyranny and to defame and punish anyone who doesn't like them. It doesn't matter that government propaganda hid nigh constant protests in France for years, or was used to defame a presidential candidate, to censor social media, to protect corrupt and incompetent politicians, to launder public support for useless and pointless wars, to hide the intel agency to big tech pipeline, to convince everyone to fear their neighbours and cripple childhood development and wear a stupid fucking mask/not wear a stupid fucking mask and give up their bodily autonomy in the name of self righteousness. What matters is that Tommy fucking Robinson can whip up a meme in ten seconds. That's when propaganda is dangerous.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I have been hermiting it up big time since getting back to Australia, and mowing my neighbour's lawn doesn't really count since I do it all the time, but I had the opportunity to do a good deed for someone the last day I was in Osaka - an old lady at the subway station dropped her umbrella and didn't realise it. She was so cute, like the platonic ideal of a little Japanese grandma, and she almost jumped out of her skin when I tapped her shoulder and she turned to see me looming over her. Then she double checked her bag like I was playing the old 'pretend someone dropped their umbrella and give them a second identical umbrella' prank on her. Then when she she realised I was being sincere she transformed from reserved and slightly suspicious to joyous gushing and appreciation, grabbing my arm and thanking me like I just pulled her off the tracks before a train arrived. The way people in Japan transform from mostly affectless to hyper animated when you break through the social conditioning is so much fun as an outsider.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Except they do not have different morals, they do not believe in the tenets of Satanism, they are trolling? Petulant trolling no less since I would bet they agree with the morality of most of the ten commandments, usually they're just having a 'fuck you dad' reaction to at least one of the first four?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I am usually the last one to figure it out, like with Darwin or Impassionata or Julius, so I assumed that's what was happening there too, otherwise I would have said something.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I found it - it's not so obvious now that I reread it, but after reading @Hoffmeister25's post about his suspicion, this post struck me as such classic hlynka in style and tone and proud sense of humour, plus the overt familiarity with the motte's inner workings, that it felt obvious.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
He did get "special treatment" but we never hid that;
If I'm right and it's all above board then uh, why are you qualifying special treatment? I'm not trying to imply anything, just confused.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
K. I meant the royal we, there was a thread a while ago where everyone many people were reminiscing about Hlynka, in which I thought Tequila basically came right out and said 'yeah gang, it's me!' in different words. And everyone many people reacted so nonchalantly that I thought it was already well known and I was just oblivious.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I genuinely do not consider you the modal case of the Parrot-apologist I dislike.
Thank you for saying so. I would say this conversation stopped going anywhere a while ago, and I think our philosophy on AI is much more aligned than you think, but... I'm not trying to start anything again, but I won't let philosophy get in the way of practicality if I don't think there is a moral component. Which is how I see this situation.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Hlynka was a mod from back on reddit who took care of troublemakers and had a bit of a chip on his shoulder from growing up poor (like most of us who grow up poor) that he used to fuel the zingers he would level at troublemakers. But being the enforcer made him bitter (like it does to everyone who assumes that role) so at some point he stopped being a mod, but his former mod status gave him leeway to continue making zingers. But people were less willing to tolerate it when he wasn't using it for the good of the community and people started to feel like he got special treatment (he did). But I think to him he just felt like he was being the same person he'd always been, and it just kind of made him angrier and eventually he flamed out.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Was this when we were all nostalgic for Hlynka and he was joking that Hlynka might be JD Vance? Because I thought he basically came right out and said it lol. I thought everyone else had already figured it out and known for ages.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
You say you're joking, and then you continue by explaining why you wouldn't intervene in another scenario where you imagine me in a cage with a tiger. You couch your "apparent hostility towards bird fanciers" in the dismissive phrase "quite a bit", leaving yourself wiggle room to continue thinking less of some - like me. Then you tell me, a stranger you have never met and never will meet who lives on the other side of the world, that you don't actually wish me dead. Implying that my concern is for my life, not the insults. Yeah, I know all the tricks, chum.
Do you want to know how I know? Because I used to prioritize my jokes over the rules of the motte. I learned the hard way, through multiple bans, that being clever is no excuse for hostility. And that hostility is often in the eye of the beholder no matter how you meant it to come across.
So where is this line? It's north of blatantly obvious cliched examples of comedic shaming like "die in a fire" that's clear, but apparently south of "I hope you get mauled by a tiger" and "you're dumber than a parrot". How about, "I hope swarms of aphids crawl down your throat"? Or "I almost want to stick a iron hook up your nose and scrape out your brains, but I see there's no point" or maybe "scientists discovered a new sub-atomic particle on the edge of the gluon field - your worthless dick". I really need to know so I can go back to 'joking' people into silence. Either way I'll be damned if I'm going to let a mod get away with it if I can't.
Now, onto your 'scaffolding'. What was it I said you'd have to tell your grandma about your intern?
You'd never actually saddle your grandmother with the mental load of dealing with an intern who is an amnesiac - and is also a compulsive liar who has mood swings, no common sense, and can't do math.
Huh, looks like I discovered the concept a while ago. And what 'scaffolding' did you just invent? A list of rules that describes an amnesiac, unreliable, potentially flattering (read lying) intern who is bad at certain tasks.
You are still deliberately missing the fundamental concept. Let me try one last time. Cognitive. Shortcut. The goal is to give a novice a powerful, easy to remember tool to 'shortcut' if you will, their biggest barrier - anthropomorphism. Your scaffolding is just a more complicated version of my model. In fact you had to gut your own metaphor (the fallible intern, closer to a human than a parrot) and adopt the primary principle of mine (it's not human) to make it work. It's funny how the grandmas and grandpas I've taught my 'bad' model to have managed to wrap their heads around it immediately - and have gone on to exceed the AI skills of many of my techbro friends.
And as for armchair psychology, you brought up your financial relationship with OpenAI as proof you aren't biased, that you aren't defending the public image of LLMs. I just pointed out how flawed that argument is by explaining basic psychological principles like the sunk cost fallacy. I honestly can not believe a trained psychiatrist is claiming paying for something is proof they aren't biased towards it. It's beyond ridiculous.
And of course paying customers can be credible reviewers. I used to be one for a living. The site I worked for refused to play the '7 out of 10 is the floor' game, so despite being part of the biggest telecommunications network in the country we had to pay for Sega and Xbox Studios games to review them. But we made an effort to check our biases, with each other and our readers. And more importantly, this isn't a product review, this is a slap fight about which mental model is is best for novice AI users. You are heavily invested in your workarounds, I understand. I am heavily invested in mine. And while I haven't been heavily into it since before it was 'cool', I did:
-
Jump in with both feet. I use Gemini 2.5 pro, which I pay for, every day. I find its g-suite integration to be an incredible efficiency enhancer.
-
Expand beyond using a single model - I have API credit for DeepSeek, Gemini, Claude, Kimi, ChatGPT, and Grok. I could say I use them every day too, except I'm currently away from my computer.
-
Develop your nuanced, multi-part user model before you did, with greater clarity.
My amusement at your condescension aside, that makes me biased too. But it also gives me the perspective to know that 'thinking like a GPT power user' isn't a universal solution. And it's working with others that gives me the perspective to know that a simple, portable mental model like the parrot is far more useful for novices across all platforms than a complex personality profile for just one.
I suspect none of what I just said matters though. Much like nothing I've said matters. You aren't arguing to enlighten, you are arguing to win the argument. That's not my assessment, in case you think this is more of my pop psychology, it was the assessment Gemini gave me prior to the last post when I put our conversation into it and asked it how I could possibly get my point across when you hadn't seemed to understand anything I'd said already. I should have listened.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Noted. You won't take back either statement - I am still dumber than a parrot (given the retreat you have been on over the last few posts I guess that's score 1 for parrots?) and you still want to see me meet a tiger outside of its cage, but you would throw rocks at it.
I am familiar with hyperbole. I am also familiar with the mechanics of shaming. I think you are too and you know that isn't a defence. Shame often uses hyperbole to express the level of emotion of the shamer and to trigger a more visceral reaction in the shamed. Can I start ending my arguments on the motte with die in a fire if I promise it's rhetorical?
On the topic of your grandma, you have my condolences. Retreating to literalism is just more condescension though, it's not an argument I will engage with, particularly when I already noted the hypothetical nature of the exercise. I will simply point out that you had the opportunity to deploy your intern model in a hypothetical with a novice user and you refused - twice now.
You have not needed to argue any of this.You're clearly capable of nuance when you want to be - over the past day you've written however many words on MIAD in that other thread and also given me a detailed breakdown of how and why you'd throw rocks at a tiger. You chose, after explaining the superiority of the intern model, not to use it. After having the discrepancy pointed out, you chose again not to use it. You can't imagine using it because it does not work as a cognitive shortcut, case closed. High five Sam Waterston. Created by Dick Wolf.
Lastly, my point about Tesla is that the fact that you are willing to pay for ChatGPT plus is a mad defence against the claim that you are evangelising on its behalf. You don't need to pay someone to advertise your product if they are already paying you, that's advertising 101 - you let the principles of brand fusion and post purchase rationalisation do their thing, eventually reinforced by the sunk cost fallacy. As these things go it's closer to a confession than it is to a defence.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
I'm pretty sure I haven't done that. My frustration isn't with your average user. It's with people who really should know better using the term as a thought-terminating cliche to dismiss the whole enterprise.
I'm pretty sure you said people like me are less intelligent than a parrot and that you hope we get mauled by a tiger. You did not specify that it was only directed at those using it to dismiss using AI, it was anyone using the term unironically. If I felt shame like normal people I would have simply stopped doing it instead of defending it - and I would no longer be helping people stop anthropomorphising a tool.
You lay out your complex 'fallible intern' model as the superior model. It can debug code and synthesise academic papers, it has a mind, though unlike any we know. You say we need to teach people to give clear instructions, provide background documents, and verify all work. But when you imagine talking to your own grandmother - a perfect example of a novice user - what do you do? You drop the intern model completely in favour of a genius with the world's worst memory. Why?
Because you know the intern model is too complicated. You know it doesn't work for a normal person. You'd never actually saddle your grandmother with the mental load of dealing with an intern who is an amnesiac - and is also a compulsive liar who has mood swings, no common sense, and can't do math. You give her a simple tool for the problem. But your tool deals with the symptom, mine deals with the cause.
I believe that you are trying to help people too, but you really are prioritising defending your model first. It might work great with techbros or the techbro adjacent, but even you drop it when you imagine a real world situation with a novice.
And I have to say, if I told you I'm not biased towards Teslas, Elon doesn't send me cheques, and in fact I just paid money for one, how wide would your eyes go as you attempted to parse that?
You might not find it insulting to have someone casually dismiss a post that is sloppily written stream of consciousness, but expressing coherent thoughts with philosophical precedent with two fucking sentences: "Not enough em-dashes to be standard LLM psychosis. Perhaps standard homegrown schizophrenia?" but I assume you aren't fucking schizophrenic. I have said before that I have learned to tolerate that kind of casual prejudice, and you will note I didn't object to anyone else saying anything like that. It doesn't particularly bother me when members of the public talk like that. But a fucking doctor casually lobbing a term that instantly makes people lose respect for you (and any psychiatrist who doesn't know that needs to prove to me they still have a license) out like that IS insulting. It is insulting to schizophrenics, it is insulting to doctors and it is insulting to the concept of the motte as a place where fucking smart people who think things through go to talk about shit they can't talk about elsewhere.
I only objected after the pivot from that to 'well hold on I know I flippantly dismissed you with the barest thought moments ago, but I am a doctor so you should listen to me'. Like I said, you can shitpost, or claim the mantle of medical professional. One or the other. Pivoting like that, assuming the freedom of shitposting and then pivoting to demand the respect of your profession is point blank unprofessional behaviour for a doctor and just outright fucking stupid for a fucking psychiatrist.
More options
Context Copy link