Anything can be a conductor if the signal is strong enough

I’m pretty certain most will unironically say this. Or hold this up as proof that you shouldn’t use a consumer level interface because you can’t even distinguish mud from banana.

Do people struggle that much more to divide dollars compared to feet?

I mean I totally get that base 12 is pretty cool for calculator-less maths (though not as cool for base 60) but ultimately, we still have a base 10 numbering system.

So yea, base 10 units for base 10 numbers. Using the same all the way down makes it easier to learn how to handle the more complicated divisions in all cases, you don’t have to switch logic if you see what I mean.

Of course, to each their own. The best case for metric remains that it’s the system everyone else has agreed on.

So the rich are so rich that they create inflation, just not because of literal hoarding, got it.

Is efficiency really the reason behind dams being somewhat intermittent? Rather than just the fact that we might not need them on all the time (needs vary), or that we just can’t leave them on all the time (not enough water flowing in), and that yes, under these conditions, operators will direct power sources in the most efficient way possible.

What I mean is like, I get that leaving a dam off 50% of the time will have it generate more power once you turn it on. But over the whole period of time, assuming enough water upstream to replenish it in either case, is it actually going to generate more electricity than leaving it on 100% of the time?

I guess what I’m asking is, rather than them being more efficient, isn’t intermittent operation of dams due to the fact that we can’t just leave them on 100% in the first place?

« Authorities have confiscated crew members’ passports to restrict travel, the sources said. They are allowed to move freely around Baltimore, but require the FBI’s permission to travel to other states.

“I’ve never seen this [detainment] before,” said a source. “It’s very unusual. But nobody wants to get into a shouting match with the FBI »

FBI can do whatever the fuck they want apparently because you know… it’s not appropriate to tell them not to

Yes, and no I did not expect further details. You seem to have been much more successful than I was at getting your point across.

I suppose I did not explicitly state what actually triggered my response, nor, in hindsight, actually specifically discussed it, my bad, sorry for that.

What did, was you stating you expected self-learning of others, which seems unfair. I suppose we all, or nearly all, do have some amount of capability for that. Yet, some people are more empowered to do so than others, and this, is either due to external circumstances (which seems unfair to expect that people at large have been subject to the same), or either to higher capability (which seems unfair to expect everyone to have higher capability because then it would just be average right?).

Furthermore, some specific things come easier to others. It’s not because you were interested in the lawn-mower and watched attentively your dad start it, that another kid will not rather be interested in the plants or the butterflies in the garden and remain rather impervious to his dad’s lawn-mower. For you it might have been easy as pie, but another kid might still need actual explanations, not because he’s stupid (although he might be), or less curious (he was interested in the butterflies) or distracted (he was concentrated on something else) or whatever else, but just because he’s wired differently (he did not find the lawn-mower interesting).

Further food for thought : Some kids are not taught that books are a worthwhile thing. Some kids have worse education than others and get very little out of school, sometimes due to their fault, but sometimes not really - teachers and classmates play a huge role. Some kids don’t really have someone doing interesting things that lets them watch, or maybe their parents stuck them in front of the TV all the time. Some people don’t have technically-minded friends with which to discuss maintenance things. Some people never had enough positive reinforcement to gain the confidence needed to say : hey, I don’t know how to do this but I can surely figure it out myself.

All in all, there’s so many external factors, that one’s ability to learn on his own is ultimately highly dependent on the other people around him. (The point of my initial reply)

logic OR, sure, at least on the basic truth-table kind of way. I think I have an idea of what you are implying but I might be too thick to properly understand. Care to expand? ;)

Indeed I do

TIL I could easily do em dashes on my phone

“Learn on your own” -> proceeds to list things that all rely on other people.

Don’t get me wrong, I understand that the willfully ignorant can get under your skin and I do believe that “self-taught” is a thing (and a valid source of pride) but only as opposed to formal education/apprenticeship.

At the end of the day, the only thing we can really do all on our own is to die alone, cold and hungry. Anything else requires help from others, indirect or direct.

Your post was very clear on what you were doing and how you were doing it, my question is why were you doing it, beyond your desire to see what it had to say, which is pretty much implied the moment you willfully prompt an LLM.

To get to the point I was trying to reach : As I’m sure you know, the output of an LLM is meant to reflect its training data (and further data it might search on the internet for), largely based on a statistical analysis of said data, all this directed by your prompt.

Using the term “slop” pushes the LLM to give more weight to the parts of its data where the same word appears, and so on for the rest of your prompt.

The result is that, what the LLM “thinks” is ultimately what humans have tended to write about, bar the possible distortion due to the amount of randomness introduced by the designers (LLM “temperature”).

These “thoughts” are not based on an analysis of the actual truth behind the words we use, but rather on an analysis of what other words appear alongside the words you have put in your prompt.

In this case, what your efforts reveal, is that human discourse where the words in your prompt occur the most, is most likely to talk about critical thinking, not-trusting AI and whatever else is included in the output you got.

In other words, this output is not even a reflection of the general credit and trust that humans give or not to LLM outputs, but a reflection of what those of us who use “slop” have written on the subject. So basically you put on a filter for “negative responses only” in the first place, since “slop” is basically a slur at this point.

Based on my own observation of human discourse on the subject, I find that the output is a rather accurate reflection of what humans write about when it comes to “slop” and actual “facts”. What I make out of your results, is that the LLM is not only working as intended, but has successfully and accurately given you what you asked of it (a clear and concise document summarizing what humans who have a negative opinion on the subject say on the supposed-facts presented in LLM output)

If anything, having the LLM reply something else would be a stronger indication of their untrustworthiness, since I’m pretty sure that nobody writes something along the lines of “AI slop gives us an accurate reflection of well-established facts and the real world.” or “You should believe in AI slop, it’s all real world facts”.

Rest assured that I remain more interested in what you have to say than in the output of an LLM, and I do put a lot more trust in your capabilities to distinguish between what people generally say and actual facts.

OMG thanks.

I think I actually knew this at some point but somehow it completely slipped my mind.

What version are you running? I just tried on Ventura, worked fine on both a .dmg package and some terminal script, both unsigned, and both would need the settings thing if I simply double clicked to open. You still get a prompt, but you have an “open anyways” option.

brew install —cask librewolf

Gentle reminder that slave labor, industrial automation and exploitation of far away lands were not even recent in 1950, and that still today, the vast majority of humanity still doesn’t have the means to own hundreds of outfits at a given time, let alone have a walk-in wardrobe.

So you trust AI enough to let it tell you that it shouldn’t be trusted but if you can’t trust AI that means it could be trusted which means…

What did you expect asking it to confirm your own opinion, opinion you made very clear by opposing “AI slop” to “actual facts”?

What makes you think that this community wants to read AI-generated slop?

What are trying to get out of this?

Thanks for the insight

Do you know of [email protected] ?

Don’t mean to imply that your post, or any women/gender-centric post, is not welcome here, I certainly think it is, but also posting over there might help you reach more women and further help you get the answers you are looking for.

If you don’t actually want to be a GM adjust these steps instead the following way :

2 - write a fun premise for a short 1-4 session adventure. Or maybe just find a prewritten, equally short, adventure.

4 - explain that you are not interested in running a full fledged campaign, but a series of short adventures. Add that you are more than happy to let others step-up and give a shot at GM-ing at some point. Do say it that you want all of this to remain fun and light-hearted ; set expectations accordingly to what you feel able to offer. Obviously, point out that you are a complete beginner at ttrpgs if that is the case.

5 - Give it your best shot but if GM-ing turns out really unbearable before you reach step 6, just say it. “Thanks guys for putting up with me and giving me a chance at GM-ing. I’ve come to realize that I’m just not cut out for this and I’d really appreciate if someone gives it a go for the next adventure. If not, I’m open to other games and activities, or just continue hanging out with you guys because your company has been a lot of fun so far. Unfortunately, I just don’t enjoy being a GM and this has been too painful for me”

You don’t have to be any good at GM-ing if your end goal is just to make friends. And GM-ing a decent enough game doesn’t have to be all that hard or require all that prep.

Of course, this will all require a certain amount of effort, likely more than just joining a game as a player. First try might not to be the right one too. You might not match with all, or any, of the players. But you don’t actually have to, starting a ttrpg with a group of strangers comes with the implication that this might not all work out.

These blogging platforms that many media host under their name and url are a fucking cancer and can be a powerful tool for manufacturing consent.

Anybody can write whatever the fuck they want and get it stamped with the supposed legitimacy of said media (only a fraction of the public will be aware enough to realize it’s not actually a proper op-ed or article). The media will conveniently claim lack of responsibility even though they give it their name, host it on their website, and possibly link to it (algorithmically or not, we can just never know) on actual op-eds and articles.

One might believe that it’s nice to empower regular people to express themselves on the internet. I’m not arguing against that. However, any bad state or otherwise organized actor, and even the host-media themself, can largely abuse it to push takes and claims that wouldn’t fly otherwise, and leverage the other means at their disposal to amplify them far beyond what regular people can achieve when using these platforms.