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/)M

mindbleach

@ mindbleach @sh.itjust.works

Posts
1
Comments
2688
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • It's a wild leap to go from 'be kind, god dammit' to 'only people on this website count.' Fuck's sake, the expanded rule makes clear it's about vast groups. You gotta bend over backwards to insist 'each other' only means 'those present.'

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • "Be excellent to each other."

    'So the outgroup has no rights or moral value.'

    I wanna throw you a monkey's paw, then sit back and watch.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Sorry, was all that talk about class just roleplay?

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Leftists are not a race.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Oh

    my

    god

    it is

    so tedious

    to read your 'well no but yes'

    crap.

    Oh sorry, casual use of expletives means I'm being emotional and unreasonable, and therefore wrong. Says guy comparing everyone who disagrees with him to Nazis. And chest-beating for consequence, as if getting banned from a website is the same as being sent to the camps. Quoting Webster without a fucking drop of irony, like I don't know what complicit means, in the multiple synonyms-- nope.

    Goodbye.

  • Google just broke all third-party YT clients, including yt-dlp; a full JS implementation is now required.

    Jump

  • Shatter.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • I will again note that I did not explicity call for any violence.

    Explicitly.

    I can commit outright felonies, stating my sincere opinions, without explicitly calling for violence.

    People inferring meaning from the things you write is not some failure of honest comprehension. It's a necessary skill we bring to every online interaction. And it's not some "resting bitch font" situation, where a completely innocuous statement was twisted beyond recognition; you called people complicit for not overthrowing the government.

    Complicit. Guilty. Criminal. Directly to blame for the worst abuses of a system clearly gone pear-shaped, because they don't agree with your exact solution to the problems they plainly oppose.

    You are calling people polite Nazis for not being 100.0% onboard with your specific political beliefs. Fuck off, guy. Regardless of what those beliefs are.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • 'Surviving within a context means you are personally at fault.'

    'Damn, why don't these stupid powerless libs we blame for everything rush to the ideology we take for granted? We're on their side!'

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • How.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Uh huh.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Never wonder why typical people have no idea what you actually believe.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Ardent leftists making themselves difficult to distinguish from campist tankies.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • Pretty sure it's more the 'or you're complicit.' Eye-rolling behavior. Even in the rare cases where it's justifiable - not this one - that rhetoric does not work. If you give a shit about the impact your words have on people, you have to not do that.

    In context, you said, if you don't help me attack the people in power, you are among the people who must be attacked. I can see a moderator weighing the letter of the rules versus the spirit of the rules, at length, and finally sighing and clicking 'I don't want to deal with this.' It shouldn't be permanent because almost no bans should be permanent. But 'take up arms or you're a Nazi' is big talk crossing any unwritten "come the fuck on" rule.

    Unwritten rules are fine. This isn't a court of law. It's an internet forum. The whole reason we have human moderators, and care who they are, is because rigidly defining shitty behavior is fundamentally impossible. See any community that's fallen for the cult of civility. Some places think being a polite Nazi is fine, but 'fuck off, Nazi' is intolerant and intolerable. Reasonable moderation requires reasonable moderators... reasoning about things. Any form of 'you're with me or you're with the devil!' can make them go, ugh, next.

  • pelespirit bans me for violating a rule that doesn't exist

    Jump

  • What are you people talking about when you lob that insult?

  • Amb. Huckabee, to Deny Gaza Genocide, Says Hamas Purposefully 'Moves' Civilians Into Israel's Bombs

    Jump

  • "We warned people to flee all the highrises we're bombing! That means it's Hamas's fault!"

  • OpenAI admits AI hallucinations are mathematically inevitable, not just engineering flaws

    Jump

  • Insisting that someone could figure it out does not mean anyone has.

    Twenty gigabytes of linear algebra is a whole fucking lot of stuff going on. Creating it by letting the computer train is orders of magnitude easier than picking it apart to say how it works. Sure - you can track individual instructions, all umpteen billion of them. Sure - you can describe broad sections of observed behavior. But if any programmer today tried recreating that functionality, from scratch, they would fail.

    Absolutely nobody has looked at an LLM, gone 'ah-ha, so that's it,' and banged out neat little C alternative. Lack of demand cannot be why.

  • OpenAI admits AI hallucinations are mathematically inevitable, not just engineering flaws

    Jump

  • Knowing it exists doesn't mean you'll ever find it.

    Meanwhile: we can come pretty close, immediately, using data alone. Listing all the math a program performs doesn't mean you know what it's doing. Decompiling human-authored programs is hard enough. Putting words to the algorithms wrenched out by backpropagation is a research project unto itself.

  • OpenAI admits AI hallucinations are mathematically inevitable, not just engineering flaws

    Jump

  • ... yes? This has been known since the beginning. Is it news because someone finally convinced Sam Altman?

    Neural networks are universal estimators. "The estimate is wrong sometimes!*" is... what estimates are. The chatbot is not an oracle. It's still bizarrely flexible, for a next-word-guesser, and it's right often enough for these fuckups to become a problem.

    What bugs me are the people going 'see, it's not reasoning.' As if reasoning means you're never wrong. Humans never misremember, or confidently espouse total nonsense. And we definitely understand brain chemistry and neural networks well enough to say none of these bajillion recurrent operations constitute the process of thinking.

    Consciousness can only be explained in terms of unconscious events. Nothing else would be an explanation. So there is some sequence of operations which constitutes a thought. Computer science lets people do math with marbles, or in trinary, or on paper, so it doesn't matter how exactly that work gets done.

    Though it's probably not happening here. LLMs are the wrong approach.

  • OpenAI admits AI hallucinations are mathematically inevitable, not just engineering flaws

    Jump

  • My guy, Microsoft Encarta 97 doesn't have senses either, and its recollection of the capital of Austria is neither coincidence nor hallucination.