Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889

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.
He's actually not a doctor either, this whole persona is part of a matchstick men style long con.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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 :/
What do you mean tried it yourself? Tried going without electricity or tried going full Colonial Williamsburg?
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.
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.
Substitute koala bears instead - they are definitely not bears.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
- Prev
- Next
If you are going to read some of the more wacky stuff about egregores, I'd suggest trying to view it as an early attempt at understanding memetics. Unless you like 19th century takes on the occult.
More options
Context Copy link