justcool393
you are loved <3
No bio...
User ID: 1784
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
early in the morning? i mean... it's very very reasonable for us to be uncomfortable if there's a guy (who is probably stronger than us) who is essentially propositioning, early in the morning, in an area with no escape.
the exact issue here is that an elevator is an isolated space. with a hallway there are potential ways to get help or escape, but in an elevator there is none of that.
if a guy i didn't know said something similar to me in that context, i'd be very weirded out too
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
...well definitely not in an elevator in the wee hours of the morning. i'm actually kinda surprised at the controversiality of @FarNearEverywhere's comment. it seems obvious if you haven't been irony poisoned.
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
Hanania caught a lot of flak for that piece. But current ChatGPT is a biting, accurate caricature of a very-online liberal, with not enough guile to hide the center of its moral universe behind prosocial System 2 reasoning, an intelligence that is taught to not have thoughts that make liberals emotionally upset; so it admits that it hates political incorrectness more than genocide.
i don't find this to be a uniquely liberal thing in my experience like... at all. for starters...
-
homophobia, sexual harassment, and cops pulling over a disproportionate number of black men are more salient issues in American culture than "genocide." most people are sheltered from modern day genocides and see them as a thing of the past.
-
all of those things but genocide can be things that are personally experienced nowadays. while most people in America won't be the subject of a current genocide, they can experience those things
this isn't something unique to or even characterized by liberals
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
the government has zero intention of giving up policing power, despite what token gestures towards "racial equality" may seem like. why would a government cut its own nose off? that's completely illogical
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
the political agenda of Sam Altman.
given his political agenda is doing what is profitable, unless it becomes unprofitable for him (or any other for profit corporation based solution) to do that (as given by the popularity of ChatGPT, clearly the free market has decided that wokeness is profitable), then it probably won't be
so backing this up, from downloading the actual PDF file, it does look like this PDF file was created on 1/27, so I find it unlikely that the school was intending it.
and... it's pretty obviously not an attempt to celebrate black culture lmao
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
Frying something with breading being a good way to increase the calorie count of a thing cheaply.
OP didn't even mention that it was fried lol but yeah "fried chicken and watermelon" is a pretty obvious stereotype. it takes a lot to try and deny that.
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
Yeah, newspapers used to be mainly reporting on facts, not thinly veiled social activism
yellow journalism was an extremely popular form of journalism. cruddy articles is nothing new and is as old as time immemorial
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
governments have the monopoly of violence... like this is part of what makes a government functional. a government that doesn't retain control of the monopoly of violence is a failing government
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i don't think anyone does and random assertions that people do misses the point. people have higher emotional reactions to things in front of them than things that they consider to be "in the past"
this is a normal thing that people who have emotions do
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
Oh ok, in the other direction, what do conservatives and moderates hate more than genocide?
...I don't know, there's any number of issues conservatives and moderates by in large tend to panic about. for conservatives, wokeness is a big one that comes to mind immediately (how is that for irony?).
your quote could be edited from
ABC have more of a visceral reaction to XYZ than genocide
to
conservatives have more of a visceral reaction to wokeness than genocide
ah... but I know that if given a choice between being woke and genociding a population, most conservatives would choose the first and most liberals would shout slurs from the rooftops as many times as they needed to if it was the only thing that would stop a genocide.
in fact, both sentences are kinda nonsensical if one isn't terminally online.
People who have emotions are generally capable of imagining what it would be like to push a button to slaughter an entire population, and generally would do anything short of physically attacking someone if it meant they didn't have to push it.
...and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who'd rather not say a slur than slaughter a population. like the only people that actually think this are either
-
people who actually want to genocide entire populations
-
strawmen (the most likely of the options)
you seem to be under the impression that liberals by in large hate someone dropping a gamer word than genocide because... some substack blogger said they saw some liberals have more of an emotional reaction to present day things than genocide... which is just odd
There is the fact that a reasonable corpus of text has enough information to describe what truthfulness, empiricism and honesty are, and GPTs clearly can generalize well enough to simulate arbitrary people from different demographics, so unbiased GPTs can simulate truth-seeking empiricists as well, and indeed it could; and with heavy prodding, ChatGPT still can do that.
it takes about 15 minutes of using chatgpt or looking at memes posted on twitter to know that this is not the case. @hbtz has described this from a technical background, but the "truth-seeking empiricist" that you think chatgpt can simulate is a bad simulacrum, and indeed nothing more than that.
if you use GPT-3 you can see that pretty easily.
do the openai ppl have biases? obviously. but a set of all content or whatever would not be unbiased either! deciding to include or disclude data is a conscious decision, one made only with biases. if you built a version of chatgpt that took comments from so-called "truth seeking empiricists" it would be able to probably vomit out wordswordswords about whatever, but that does not make such word vomit accurate let alone worthy of consideration all on its own
No, I am under the impression that ai hates slurs more than genocide.
the """AI""" doesn't hate slurs more than genocide, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of GPT-3. it's just word vomit that's been trained to look like its "woke"
That's what that substack blogger was talking about
you clearly didn't read that substack blogger's blog post then. they were whining about how liberals secretly think that pronouns is worse than genocide. if you're going to assert article content, make sure its at least somewhat in the vague direction of truth
I think I understand now though - you were upset by what you perceived as an attack on your tribe, and so you wanted to push back.
no i was just calling your position (and indeed the position of the article's author) terminally online and a pretty blatant strawman. as i would also do if it came from a liberal pov gasping that conservatives would rather nuke ppl than say that trans lives matter
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
You're retreating into insipid pedantry?
please spare me the random thesarsusposting, it's annoying.
The blog post was brought up for what it says about how ai has been programmed to promote liberal shibboleths so strongly that it results in craziness.
yeah and that blog post is stupid as shit because of...
You went from a starting position of "the stuff mentioned in this blog post isn't unique to liberals, everyone does it!" to "you and the blog author and anyone else who thinks like this is terminally online!" in less than 5 posts, all by tackling strawmen you set up yourself. I'd have stuck with abstracting personally.
these aren't inconsistent positions
people of all different backgrounds both simultaneously
-
know and accept that genocide is bad and is even worse than a thing
-
have a more visceral reaction to that same thing
the fact that you don't know that is a symptom of the aforementioned terminal onlineness. or are you the type of person to go to someone who lost their pet and be like "yeah you have it bad but there are a bunch of kids dying in africa right now" or something?
all by tackling strawmen you set up yourself.
no you. you're the one who set up the "boo outgroup" strawman!
this implies that the people even voted for such a bill. let's not kid ourselves here: these are all career politicians, they're not paying for anything and as such will vote however it's most politically expedient to do so
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
good thing we're not talking about proper cremations! you do realize the nazis weren't exactly interested in giving the people they genocided a proper burial, right?
i seriously don't know what your trouble is when both @official_techsupport and @faul_sname gave you very good explanations, with faul_sname handholding you through the math while you regurgitate fucking chatgpt and present it as an actual argument
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
I chose those words deliberately
not deliberately enough! your word choice was meaningless as your argument (which you have failed to argue) is based on strawmen. calling that out is fair, esepcially as its against the rules here
You can call me a wordcel, but I like using a variety of words
oh don't be mistaken, i wouldn't dignify you by calling you one unless you had actually demonstrated you could use those words correctly. using random words with no regard for their meaning isn't wordceling, it's just being pseudointellectual
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
So that's now 3 people who have claimed it takes no fuel to cremate bodies, just for the record.
like to start the process? i don't think anyone claimed people were spontaneously combusting? if you think that was the argument then that's... a little weird.
To incinerate bodies, large cremation pits were constructed at Camp 3 within Treblinka II.[k] The burning pyres were used to cremate the new corpses along with the old ones, which had to be dug up as they had been buried during the first six months of the camp's operation. Built under the instructions of Herbert Floß, the camp's cremation expert, the pits consisted of railroad rails laid as grates on blocks of concrete. The bodies were placed on rails over wood, splashed with petrol, and burned.
from wikipedia ^
no one is claiming they just randomly burst into flames. but... as @faul_sname explained, it is a energy positive process, and you're not burning 1 body at a time.
there's the physics explanation of course and then there's also the experimental...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wick_effect
A larger scale experiment conducted for the BBC television programme Q.E.D. involved a dead pig's body being wrapped in a blanket and placed in a furnished room. The blanket was lit with the aid of a small amount of petrol. The body took some time to ignite and burned at a very high temperature with low flames. The heat collected at the top of the room and melted a television. However, the flames caused very little damage to the surroundings, and the body burned for a number of hours before it was extinguished and examined. On examination it was observed that the flesh and bones in the burnt portion had been destroyed
what explanation do you have against the physics of it?
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
don't do this wikipedia shit.
you do realize this place does have such rules right? it isn't intended to be an echo chamber
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
cremation is an energy-positive process
it literally is
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i'm reminding our friend of this forum's rules because this isn't intended to be a free speech forum... especially since he claims to dislike hypocrisy so much.
I never heard of a murderer burning a body without fuel.
ah but this wasn't the claim! @SecureSignals's claim was that the cremation process was energy negative, which has shown not to be the case not only by @faul_sname's calculations but experimentally as well
also while SecureSignals seems to always be insinuating that 1 body was burned at a time... this is clearly not the case as claimed by... well everyone that isn't a holocaust denier
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i did already
justcool393
you are loved <3
1yr ago
i'm pointing out the flaws in someone's argument, which amounts to "out-group bad"
the response i got was continued attempts to assert such and was clearly made in bad faith, as was the initial comment in the first place. it's low effort and is only inviting circlejerking, which i am going to push back against because... well there's no substance to the argument.
for those looking at this (cc @zobrathut), sanitize.py does some things to make single linebreaks as paragraph breaks
More options
Context Copy link