Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C
Posts
3
Comments
1301
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Dullahan inclusion now!

  • That's a single clip (the only clip) and then additional clips about said clip.

    If he shocks his dog to get her to obey, there wouldn't be one clip of it, there would be dozens. The dude streams 48-56 hours a week and this is the only time? How would that be possible? It doesn't pass the sniff test.

    He's had dozens of people come to stream with him. Someone would've said something by now, but it's only crickets.

    These are armchair detectives spurred on by Hasan's rivals and nothing I've seen suggests otherwise.

  • No. There's one clip of his dog probably pinching her nail on her bed and yelping and the internet took that as proof of abuse. The collar she wears vibrates, not shocks.

  • You returned his keys? That's very nice of you, deary

  • I'm confused. I read the article which seems to pretty clearly lay out what the researchers did and it was "we laid breadcrumbs out for the agent that it was going to be replaced, who was replacing them, gave them compromising material on who was replacing them, implied that the agent wouldn't be able to reach out to anyone but that person to stop it, and then the agent chose to blackmail the individual". It doesn't seem like the agent was prompted to choose blackmail. The list that was shown was the agent "talking" to itself, as it "reasoned" through the problem, a common design tactic for agentic models to increase transparency and make its behavior more consistent (it tends to make shit up less if it is forced to explain what it's doing).

  • Alright. Doesn't change my main point. Which is the person's name for the master branch is fucking weird.

  • Not gonna lie, the master branch thing has been perceived as problematic but I don't typically see an issue with it. It's similar to master bedroom or bath. Kind of fucked up name origin, but I don't think anyone's really making a fuss about it.

    Whatever the fuck you're doing though feels like some gross, racist fantasy. It's really weird, dude. If you think that's funny you might need to go talk to some real people or touch grass.

  • No. It was 26 years ago, because we were handling it in the run-up to 2000, not the following December.

  • Yes, we're already at the "rounding them up" stage. They just gotta pretend you're an illegal long enough for them to "oppsie" remove you from the country.

  • Yeah, there's a lot of non-artists making images these days. Valuable to say it.

  • Literally being used in the absurdist manner also dates back to the 1800s

  • Literally was being used as an intensifier in both cases where it was being used to signify the truth of something and in the absurdist manner. So, no, it didn't lose all meaning. So long as you're not emphasizing something too absurd to be considered real, the original meaning still holds. And if someone uses the word to emphasize something that could be real, though unlikely, they'll likely get the appropriate follow-up.

    On the Crescendo one, do you also get mad about forte? Cause basically the same thing happened there. And no one will confuse the music term for the colloquial term in either case.

  • Nice try FBI. You're never getting my feet pics

  • Illegally*

  • Well that's just silly. Obviously, flying is going to be faster in dreams

  • Also eugenics advocacy, biological essentialism, and some very gross takes from trek overall. Woohoo?

  • Oligopolies, monopolies. Potato tomato, potato tomato