Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
He's actually not a doctor either, this whole persona is part of a matchstick men style long con.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
Lmao I am stealing this framing. And yeah, I remember seeing on the ABC a study showed that in Australia 70% of people are unlikely to ever drive above 120 km/h, let alone miles. My perception of speed is poor in the opposite direction - as a kid I couldn't really believe the speeds in Australia - we have to do 50km/h in suburbs? Why not just walk?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
I think they're imagining it as if they were standing still, and you zip past at 120. People aren't good at imagining speeds compared to anything other than stopped.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
I'm glad you said this, because I both agree with what you said and disagree with what you said from another perspective. And maybe I'm using parasocial wrong.
I wouldn't consider reading user reviews on reddit or watching rlm reviews parasocial at all, although I guess they are one sided relationships. But like you said the valence almost goes the other way - I know that when I read reddit idgaf about the stranger whose post I'm reading (unless they consistently knock it out of the park enough for me to notice), but if I post on reddit I use even more casual language than I do normally - I write for the hypothetical audience. But the parasociality with ai I was thinking of, oh yes that's different. That's parasocial in the same sense as those crazy ladies who attack soap stars for cheating on their lover in the show. That's true parasociality, a relationship entirely imagined by the viewer, as great or as terrible as they desire.
Because I would say you are right that there fundamentally isn't anyone writing it so you don't get anyone's thoughts and feelings - but you do get the zeitgeist position, which is an amalgamation of everyone's thoughts and feelings. It won't tell you what is true, but it is fantastic at telling you what popular consensus thinks is true. Forming a relationship with that is bonkers, but the narcissist in me sure sees the appeal.
And when I use it as a search engine I do prefer a conversation even though there's no one at the other end. I have always thought better with someone to bounce off, I always viewed taking notes to read the next day as sort of bouncing off myself, so using ai that way was a natural fit. And for general information that is easy to find, ai is much better than a search engine - that's why Google and Microsoft put it at the top of the search. Yeah you have to verify it's real, but you already had to do that with Google and Wikipedia! Or should have been.
That's why I wanted to know if my examples count as 'talking just to talk' - that's how I would describe them, but it's not about company, it's about information and novelty. But maybe I'm just flattering myself by saying that in the eyes of those squicked out by ai? I know I feel like I've been typical minding just assuming everyone is as enamoured with words as I am. I was aware I have a broader tolerance for slop than most but I figured if anyone here was a slow ai adopter it would be me, and most people here would be running their own llms already while I'm still playing around with the public models.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
Brainless degenerates seem to be a minority of people behind the wheel of a car,
You lost me here man. Most people driving are brainless degenerates imo. They're just insulated from their mistakes, literally, by a ton of steel.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
What do you mean by socialise? I asked it to tell me about the critical and audience receptions of Sinners just now, then argued with it about why historical accuracy is no bar to activists, does that count? Also I made a bot that was teaching me about python and Linux speak as if it was Hastur, because it makes me smile, but I soon discovered that I could much more easily understand it because I could more easily discern the fluff from the substance. If you mean parasocial relationships, the answer is they're parasocial relationships :/
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
4d ago
What do you mean tried it yourself? Tried going without electricity or tried going full Colonial Williamsburg?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
4d ago
Absolutely. Part of the problem with social media is that it's so convenient, removing the convenience removes that 'I'm bored, oh X is right there in my notifications telling me Elon Musk has explained "the implication" to Trump, what's that about?' action.
But I'm also the kind of person who gets very upset when someone tells me to just not use fast travel if I don't like it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
4d ago
Yeah that's what I was thinking. In a way I think this might be a good thing - I think being 'an individual' is hard for a lot of people. It's certainly a pain in the ass in my opinion. Also I have nothing to back this up as usual but I think it's healthier to be an unique example of an archetype than to just be an individual in this identity focused world, because it gives people an anchor to cling to when they get cancelled.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Substitute koala bears instead - they are definitely not bears.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Or to think about it another way, a generation's pop culture isn't the pop culture created by that generation necessarily, it's the pop culture enjoyed by them. So there is a Charlie Brown Christmas special for boomers and one for Gen x and one for millenials despite them all being written by Charles Schulz who was born in the 20s.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Well it would be a similar result, but not the same result. To synthesise what it told me into a sentence it was basically "stereotypes are real but just a guide, people are a composite of their genes and their upbringing."
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
I made my response multiple choice. Pick as you please:
A) Magic. The gathering, I mean. The cards speak to me in tongues man has forgotten - but our genes remember. And my neighbour Gene is happy to translate for me.
B) Because human perception of time is linear so things aren't ruined until they are?
C) Are you hoping that disproving my jovial rebuttal of the 'gaslighting kids is funny' argument will convince me transing kids is a good idea? Because it won't.
D) All of the above.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Pretty much everything "humorous maybe" was ruined by millenials. We took gross out comedies too far (Freddy got fingered) we took teen comedies too far (Van Wilder sequels) we took sports comedies too far (Baseketball), we took internet absurdism too far (somethingawful), stoner comedy too far (Pineapple Express) meme comedy too far (shit my dad says), political comedy too far (Trump vs Clinton) - I love elements of everything I just mentioned, but each of those killed their genres.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
The special pleading started during the summer of love. It was the fact that protest was so essential to our nation that it overpowered medical science, so essential that it justified burning and looting cities, that caused the Jan 6ers to think storming the capitol was a good idea. In a way they were primed to do it - if burning and looting is an appropriate response to the perception that black men are being slaughtered by the police, what is the appropriate response to the perception of the theft of the election?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
I don't want my nephews to chop their dicks off. I can see how it was humorous maybe for prior generations, but as always millenials took the joke too far and ruined it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
Yeah you'll get nothing from it really. Depending on the model they usually have between 5 and 10 messages. And it's only chatgpt that can do it thanks to its latest update - to do it with others you need to do it at the end of a long meandering chat session otherwise you just get a reflection of whatever you're talking about right then. The really interesting version will be when Gemini can tap into your Google account, although I will let others test that one.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
Cherry studio is great for this thanks to the knowledge base and regular expression features. With the knowledge base you can grab a bunch of books you like and add them to it and the ai will adopt the style and theme of the books. Add a bunch of Sanderson books and you'll get a different style than if you added a bunch of Salvatore books for example. Or you could add a bunch of Tom Clancy books and watch it spend paragraphs describing guns.
If you want Lovecraftian horror though, don't do Lovecraft - it's just not fleshed out enough in the works themselves. The best I've found so far is a mix of Thomas Ligotti and Brian Lumley - Lumley's Titus Crow books are kinda dumb, but meticulous in their coverage of everything in the mythos, so pairing him with Ligotti gets you cool shit like taking all your missions from brains in jars and the hounds of tindalos coming for anyone who uses time manipulation, plus the occasionally beautiful turn of phrase.
And then there's the new regular expression feature, which is regex, so you can very easily set up a basic randomised combat system with it. It won't be particularly intricate, but it will give you random attacks that whittle away your hp, you can add status effects like sleep (character can't act) and paralysis (roll 1d5 to see if the character acts) and critical hits. The only caveat is that you have to keep track of your hp and mention it frequently, or set your prompt up to always mention party hp and status. Or better yet both, otherwise the assistant will forget.
The first thing I did was read your post and the first sentence and a half of @urquan's post and immediately ran and asked chatgpt and gemini to create an image based on how you feel about me. When I asked chatgpt I got this which is great. Gemini on the other hand gave me this, which made me laugh and realise I should probably try reading posts properly. Can I ask what prompt you used? Likewise urquan? I also asked grok and got this. It insists it's based on our chat history and not just the session I asked it in, but I'm not sure I believe it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
8d ago
Or your purpose in life is to get recreationally smashed in the balls.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
8d ago
But by saying they want to self destruct all you are doing is absolving yourself of the responsibility to help them by putting your failure on them. I'm saying absolve yourself of responsibility, it's not your responsibility to fix them any more than you feel is required of your morals - but don't put your failure on them. If you write people off, you probably had good reasons, but you still wrote them off. Saying you wrote them off because they made you is passing the buck. Like always, my biggest concern is personal responsibility.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9d ago
You seem to be focused on pedantry, based on your determination that the suicidal fit who I was talking about because suicide is self destruction, so I don't think you are interested in my point. Talking, if bitching is too 'harsh'.
Mentally healthy people do not want to self destruct, no. Doing so 'as cope' is talking themselves into it via perverse incentives, but they don't want to self destruct, they want the psychological comfort of believing they are in control.
Edit: "They just want to self destruct" is a defense mechanism. It is a person saying they have tried to help in every way they can think of and it doesn't work and so they must want it. But addicts and other mentally ill people can be helped - it's just really unpleasant and hard, harder than anyone should have to go through without a salary. Which is to say nobody should be expected to do it and shouldn't feel ashamed that they didn't. But that doesn't mean that the mentally ill want to self destruct, that doesn't mean they are intent on destroying their lives and bringing everyone else down with them - that is just easier to accept than your own helplessness.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9d ago
What I did learn from this, as well as from every situation similar to this that I've witnessed, is that people who are intent on destroying their lives aren't going to listen to reason, and are going to continue alienating everyone around them until there's nobody left and they're forced to face God alone.
God damn it, addicts are addicted and no amount of waspish dressings down can overpower chemical dependence. Nobody wants to ruin their life - that's cope - they are reacting to stimuli. Modern society has twisted that stimuli and now perverse incentives make it easier than ever to self destruct. Did he really think it was cool or was it actually just cope?! Like he was stealing from your friend thinking "I'm Remington Steele!" and not 'I don't want to feel any more, my head is pounding, my arms are shaking, my stomach roils but worst of all is the shame, the knowledge I am doing the wrong thing and I can't stop, I hate myself but I can't stop.'*
It's certainly a decent life, but it's a far cry from what he wanted to be. Sales guys can make more money than I do, but money does not equal status. The best he can hope for on that front, where he is now, is hanging out with local contractors and small-town bank managers at steakhouses housed in strip malls, and a couple times a year taking his wife out to one of the restaurants with dazzling views of the city that attract the kind of people who say "ooh, classy" when they walk inside but that no one with any kind of real status would be caught dead in, not least of which because they serve overpriced "funeral food". Then again, maybe had he been more mature he'd have realized that this was a life worth pursuing, since those of us who ended up working in Downtown offices with floor to ceiling windows and personal secretaries realized that all that gets you is invitations to impossibly boring parties hosted by judges and politicians that everyone attends out of obligation and no one actually enjoys. Then again, maybe the whole status thing was a phase he would have grown out of, or maybe he would have just been to untalented or lazy to ever have a shot at the big leagues to begin with.
Call no man happy until he is dead. You are right that he didn't achieve his dreams and you are right that you have more status than he does. You are right that he will never achieve your level of success, and he won't have to suffer through parties and a corner office. But he also isn't bitching about you on an anonymous forum for contrarian autists.
*I'm not saying 'just be nice to junkies and let them do what they want' I'm saying what I said, nobody wants to self destruct. Enabling is not kindness.
I can see how you might think the hoons are the problem, but it's actually the 'safe sensible' drivers who inspire this behaviour, because they legit get mad if you 'cheat' and get in front of them. For example, in Australia when they're going 20km under the speed limit and you are already only going a max of 110kmh (70mph) on any major highway. So they sit there in the right (left) hand lane doing fucking 90 (55) - but if traffic clears up in the lane next to them and you put your indicator on, they will speed up until there are cars in that lane again. But if you just drop a gear and go for it you can usually pass them before they realise.
Or those pricks who decide to merge as soon as they reach broken lines, instead of going to the end of the lane because that's how it was designed. If you give the appearance of not following suit by not putting your indicator on there, they will decide to teach you a lesson by riding the line between lanes, not giving you enough room to pass. But if you put your indicator on and wait for them to merge enough to let you past, you can flick your indicator off and merge properly.
Driving defensively is cool, but not nearly as cool as driving offensively.
More options
Context Copy link