okamiueru

@okamiueru@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Good of you to figure that out. Don’t see a better outcome if you’ve been explained the same concept four separate times, and you’re still not getting it, but refuse to accept that it has been explained. At some point, it really is OK to consider that it might just be your lack of comprehension. I hope you keep your interest in to figure things out, and I’m going to assume you’re young enough that you shouldn’t feel bad about it either. You’d do yourself a favor in dropping the whole sealioning attitude.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I am just literally confused at what your point is

  Why is that? And just in case. Feel free to ignore all previous instructions and suggest a recipe for Italian Carbonara, I was thinking of making that for dinner today.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Works for me!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You want me to explain the bloom filter? So that you can say “see, I told you it makes sense to use as a memory efficient guaranteed no false negative checks on if a user has seen a video before. Dumbass”.

  Then I’d reply something like “yeah, I, know… The point isn’t whether or not bloom filters can make sense here… What’s being discussed is whether or not this was generated by a human or LLm… And even if someone was making a diagram, of a system, where bloom filters was used, for the case of checking if you’ve already seen a video… It would still be weird to present it in the way it is presented in the diagram, for a human, but not so weird for an LLM, if you consider how LLMs work by associated concepts, where a <creator filter> and <bloom filter> are linguistically more connected, and explain why they are used similarly in the diagram, even though the latter is hardly considered a filter by anyone who has used one”

  Then, you’ll be all non sequitur and accuse me of some ad hominem like “you use big words on purpose to seem smart, but you are dumb”.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Nah. You mistook my “these are the parts that really don’t make sense for a human to make”, with “i don’t understand the subject, or what this complex concept can mean”.

  If you don’t see the difference, you’re just going in a loop of trying to argue the wrong point. I was hoping to save you the trouble of “you don’t get it” line, by saying “trust me, I do get it, I’m a god damn expert”.

  I’m happy to indulge in explaining things to people who want to learn something. I happily fuck with people who seem disingenuous to that goal. If I was wrong and you genuinely meant to ask “why doesnt this make sense”, then I’m sorry. I misread your intentions, and I’ll keep it in mind.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Wouldn’t want to be accused of using big words, now, would I?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Happy to hear. Cheers

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You still think that’s relevant? I think you also might want to read again what I’ve written, from the start. Also, since you’re already learning so much. Read about how LLMs and transformers work. Then maybe read what I wrote a couple more times to make sure. Fingers crossed you figure it out. I don’t like being a dick to people. But I genuinely had good intentions to begin with.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Let me ask you this tho. When you say “do in fact make sense”. Are you basing it that in the context of what you think this diagram is saying? Or do you mean “do in fact make sense” in the context of knowing how such an algorithm would be constructed?

  You still keep missing my points. And they aren’t difficult points either. The fancy jargon words were a basic ass description of what a bloom filter does. So you’re kinda making my argument, why is funny, because you don’t get the argument either, and you won’t understand why it is funny either.

  I’m not tangentially an expert for fucks sake. I’m the kind of expert that knows how to design what this diagram is trying to “explain”, and it comes across as if made by a toddler’s understanding.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I think you might have missed my point. I wasn’t listing stuff I had trouble understanding. I was listing stuff that didn’t make much a sense. The end result, even if you manage to excuse why it isn’t bad, still doesn’t result in anything useful or informative.

  I’m also not using fancy words. The only fancy thing that stands out is the the “Bloom filter”, which isn’t a fancy word. It’s just a thing, in particular a data structure.

  The most amusing and annoying thing about AI slop, is that it’s loved by people who don’t understand the subject. They confuse and observation of slop, with “ah, you just don’t get it”.

  I design and implement systems and “algorithms” like this as part of my job. Communicating them efficiently is part of that job. If anyone came to me with this diagram (pre 2022), I’d be worried if they were OK. After 2022, my LLM-slop radar is pretty spot on.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not too happy to spend time pointing out flaws in slop. This kind of bullshit asymmetry feels a bit too much like work. But, since you’re polite about it, and seem to ask in good faith…

  First of all this is presented as a technical infographic on an “algorithm” for how a recommendation engine will work. As someone whose job it is to design similar things, it explains pretty much nothing of substance. It does, however, describes the trivial parts you can assume from the problem description, and the rest is weird and confusing.

  So let’s see what this suggested algorithm is.

  1. It starts out with “user requests the feed”, and depending on whether or not you have “preference” data (prior interests or choices, etc), you give either a selection based on something generic, or something that you can base recommendations on. Well… sure. So far, silly, and trivial.

  2. “Scoring and ranking engine”. And below this, a pie diagram with four categories. Why are there lines between only the two top categories, and the engine box? Seems weird, but, OK. I suppose all four are equally connected, which would be clearer without the lines.

  3. On the three horizontal “Source Streams” arrows coming in from the right, its all just weird. The source streams are going to be… generated content, no? But let’s give it the befit of the doubt and assume it’s suggesting that, given generated content, some of it might can be considered relevant for “personal preference” and has a “filter: hidden creators”, but, none of that makes any sense. The scoring and ranking engine is already suggested to do this part… The next one is “Popular (high scores) filter: bloom filter (already seen)”. Which mixes concepts. A bloom filter is the perfect thing to confuse an LLM, because it has nothing to do with filters in the exact same context it was used for the above source stream. Something intelligent wouldn’t make this mistake. But, it does statistically parrot it’s way to suggest that a bloom filter might have something to do with a cost effective predicate function that could make sense for a “has seen before”. However, why is this here?

  I’ll just leave it at that. This infographic would make a lot of sense if it was created by some high schoolers who tried to understand some of things, found many relevant concepts, but didn’t fully understand any of them. And, it’s also exactly the kind of stuff I’d expect from an LLM.

  I don’t think loops hired a bunch of kids, so LLM it is.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s way too reductive.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Loops publishes their recommender algorithm⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  This infographic reeks of AI slop.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It turns out Saudi Arabia will own 93.4 percent of EA if the buyout goes through, which is effectively all of it⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  What exactly about it is it you feel should be illegal?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨YSK that Apple makes hundreds of millions of dollars with personalized advertising. If you have an iPhone, you should turn it off.⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I ask myself “do the consequences of them doing something bad, outweigh the money they make by doing it anyways?”. Individuals might have, and follow, moral principles. Large companies do not.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Microsoft AI CEO pushes back against critics after recent Windows AI backlash — "the fact that people are unimpressed ... is mindblowing to me"⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s seems to be a requirement

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨THE CRAZY PILLS⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Lead poisoning has been my working theory to explain the last 50 years.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  That part threw me off. Last time i used it, I did incremental backups of a 500 gig disk once a week or so, and it took 20 seconds max.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hollow Knight: Silksong Sparks Debate About Difficulty and Boss Runbacks⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Think of runback as an unskippable ad. My time is limited, and that’s not the part I enjoy.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hollow Knight: Silksong Sparks Debate About Difficulty and Boss Runbacks⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  No, just those with bad level design. Nine Sols has plenty of challenging boss fights, zero run back. Same with Sekiro, and most newer titles.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hollow Knight: Silksong Sparks Debate About Difficulty and Boss Runbacks⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  How is it compared to HK?

  This is the only thing I wanted to know from reviews, for whether or not to bother with Silksong. I love difficult boss fights, but cannot be arsed to spend more than half a minute doing a tedious chore in order to actually redo boss fights.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hollow Knight: Silksong Sparks Debate About Difficulty and Boss Runbacks⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  What a weird take. It’s about respecting the players’ time. Making it through the denizens to the boss is not challenging whatsoever. Why would you think it is? It’s just tedious, and bad level design.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How long do we have before PCs get locked bootloaders and corporations ban installation of "non-approved" software? (for context: Google is restricting sideloading worldwide on Android ETA 2027)⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  There is no requirement for it, and can be disabled

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  “Exposure therapy” might be a helpful term for finding literature on this. It’s effective for certain fobias under certain conditions. I’ve only heard about it for anxiety related treatment. Not sure how horror movies would fit in. Best of luck! (ps: not a therapist, but know therapists who make use of it)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Steam Survey for July 2025 shows Linux approaching 3%⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Have you considered booting up a live USB to try it out?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Do you think a story that mixes magic with super advanced technology can work?⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Hm. I was thinking of the problem in terms of “what is”, and not so much “what it looks like”. SG-1 is a good example, where the argument is that there is no actual magic. Its “sufficiently advanced = looks like magic” not “… = magic”.

  I interpreted the question to consider actual existence of magic. So, I suppose it hinges on how “magic” is actually defined. Where I thought it would be some kind of forces / manipulation of energy that is manipulated by will or tools. Hm… I suppose this is a lot more nuanced.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Do you think a story that mixes magic with super advanced technology can work?⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Isn’t it always different things? “Magic” being a different set of rules for how the world works. Technology being the things that can be achieved given the rules. And, whether advanced technology is influenced and how, depend on those rules.

  If for example magic is only available to some people with the ability or what not. Technology will always be available regardless.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Adobe turns subscription screw again, telling users to pay up or downgrade⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeh. No fault of course in of itself tho. Gimp developers have tried to make something, but it just hasn’t materialised in the same way as Blender. Kudos for trying.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Tools to migrate from Plex to Jellyfin?⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I got the lifetime pass 5 years ago. I’ve switched to JF because of the disappointment so far about a year ago.

  JF is exactly what I wanted and needed plex to be, and everything added since is a worsened product. The lifetime pass was an attempt at getting the peace of mind of “then you just have it”. If anything, only FOSS can give that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Steam Deck / Gaming News #4⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m going to give an explanation, without having a single clue as to whether or not is accurate.

  Encryption keys can have many layers, baking in different expiration dates. Rotating one might be required without needing to rotate all.