9bananas
@9bananas@feddit.org
- Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments 1 week ago:
the problem here is that this is in a university setting.
the student has almost certainly been made aware of what “discussion” means.
i explained in a different comment (check my profile if the link doesn’t work, not sure how to properly link comments…) why this is not a sufficient excuse.
because the previous comment seemed well received, I’ll try to give another example of how this sort of course might generally play out:
at a typical university you’ll get some general orientation at the beginning of the first semester. this will include things like the rules for exams, the rules for the campus, the rules for the dorms (if there are any), the rules for general conduct and behavior on-campus, and a ton of other shit like safety drills in case of a fire or other catastrophe, laboratory training (if relevant), and on and on. there’s a LOT to cover in the first few weeks. you’ll probably sign a bunch of forms that say “i have read the rules” in legalese, so that there is proof that you have been made aware of the rules.
this orientation will include, or be closely followed by, a class on scientific work.
this course will cover the scientific method, scientific literature, scientific citations (in the specific style of your field and university), the formatting of all your submissions (there’s usually a template you are supposed to use, though this is somewhat dependant on the teacher of any given class.)
there will also be sections on scientific language: the difference between a scientific theory and a “theory” in casual language, what a scientific paper really is and how to tell the difference between a high quality and a low quality paper (or if the paper is just complete nonsense.), and so forth.
this is were the student in the OP almost certainly learned how the assignment given was supposed to be written.
there’s literally entire classes for this specific thing.
and yeah, that’s because it’s actually difficult to do properly!
there’s nothing “unfair”, or “unexpected”, or “insufficiently clear” about this work assignment.
it can seem that way to someone who hasn’t been to university, but to everyone who has, it’s clear as day.
there is never a need to point out things like “you need to use proper citations in your work”, or “you need to follow the scientific method”, because this has already been covered and is then expected in damn near every assignment afterwards.
it’s the expected standard.
so there are two possibilities here:
either the student hasn’t absorbed the material of the previously mentioned class, and just kinda winged it, hoping for the best, and is thus simply an exceedingly bad scientist, which means the failure was entirely deserved.
…or they did it on purpose, and the failure was entirely deserved.
my money is definitely on the latter.
TL;DR:
she damn well knew this submission would be disqualified.
because all students know this.
it’s literally the scientific method, and thus one of the very first things they teach you at university.
hope this clears up why none of this is explicitly mentioned in the assignment, but feel free to ask more questions!
- Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments 1 week ago:
the evidence is: this is a university course.
this is normal for every university in the world. everyone that’s ever taken a university course knows this.
it’s quite literally the scientific method.
it’s almost never spelled out anywhere, because students generally have dedicated courses that teach this method and related things like researching, proper citations, writing structures and styles, etc.
usually called something like “scientific working” or something (don’t know what it’s called in english, german is usually something like “wissenschaftliches arbeiten”).
this isn’t kindergarten; there are prerequisites and they are expected by default.
these aren’t children, they’re adults.
and everyone involved knew this in advance.
this is not “hidden” oder “secret”.
it’s a standard.
- Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments 1 week ago:
yes, exactly!
what i think is rather important to point out:
even in theology this shit wouldn’t fly!
that’s how absurd this “controversy” is.
because even in theology you need to provide sound argumentation and sources. even there you need more evidence than this “student” submitted.
it’s just…so, so absurd.
- Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments 1 week ago:
you are confusing the assignment and the grading.
they are two separate things.
the assignment was:
- A discussion of why you feel the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)
- An application of the study or results to your own experiences
the submission failed on both these points, and thus it is automatically disqualified, no grading is even applied.
there was no discussion in the submission.
“discussion” in an academic context is a technical term that means “examining a topic based on evidence from some point of view”. you may have encountered something similar in school as a pro/contra essay. in academia this gets expanded on by requiring evidence in the form of citations in order to support one’s positions and conclusions (or lack thereof).
since the student did not provide sources, this point of the assignment is not fulfilled.
the same goes for the second point, for the same reasons: insufficient evidence was provided.
the teachers explain this in their response.
since neither part of the assignment is fulfilled no grading is applied: it’s an automatic failure.
this is also explained in the response.
you may want to carefully read the responses again, and keep in mind that all of this is happening in an academic context. providing evidence is expected by default.
“i believe”, “i feel”, 'the bible says", etc., are NOT evidence in a scientific context…
- Comment on Oracle made a $300 billion bet on OpenAI. It's paying the price. 2 weeks ago:
sure, and that works at small scales and as long as no change is required.
when either of those two change (large projects where interdependent components become inevitable and frequent updates are necessary) it becomes impossible to use AI for basically anything.
any change you make then has to be carefully considered and weighed against it’s consequences, which AIs can’t do, because they can’t absorb the context of the entire project.
look, I’m not saying you can’t use AI, or that AI is entirely useless.
I’m saying that using AI is the same as any other tool; use it deliberately and for the right job at the right time.
the big problem, especially in commercial contexts, is people using AI without realizing these limitations, thinking it’s some magical genie that can everything.
- Comment on Oracle made a $300 billion bet on OpenAI. It's paying the price. 2 weeks ago:
yes, that’s exactly the point of everything I’ve said:
to an inexperienced user/developer/admin the output LLMs produce look perfectly valid, and for relatively trivial tasks they might even work out…but when it gets more specialized it fails spectacularly and it gets extremely obvious just how limited of a system it really is.
which is why there is so much pushback from professionals. actually that’s pretty much all professionals, not just in IT.
- Comment on Oracle made a $300 billion bet on OpenAI. It's paying the price. 2 weeks ago:
yeah, no… that’s not at all what i said.
i didn’t say “AI doesn’t work”, i said it works exactly as expected: producing bullshit.
i understand perfectly well how to get it to spit out useful information, because i know what i can and cannot ask it about.
I’d much rather not use it, but it’s pretty much unavoidable now, because of how trash search results have become, specifically for technical subjects.
what absolutely doesn’t work is asking AI to perform highly specific, production critical configurations on live systems.
you CAN use it to get general answers to general questions.
“what’s a common way to do this configuration?” works well enough.
“fix this config file for me!” doesn’t work, because it has no concept of what that means in your specific context. and no amount of increasingly specific prompts will ever get you there. …unless “there” is an utter clusterfuck, see the OP for proof…
- Comment on Oracle made a $300 billion bet on OpenAI. It's paying the price. 2 weeks ago:
no, AI just sucks ass with any highly customized environment, like network infrastructure, because it has exactly ZERO capacity for on-the-fly learning.
it can somewhat pretend to remember something, but most of the time ot doesn’t work, and then people are so, so surprised when it spits out the most ridiculous config for a router, because all it did was string together the top answers on stack overflow from a decade ago, stripping out any and all context that makes it make sense, and presents it as a solution that seems plausible, but absolutely isn’t.
LLMs are literally design to trick people into thinking what they write makes sense.
they have no concept of actually making sense.
this is not am exception, or an improper use of the tech.
it’s an inherent, fundamental flaw.
- Comment on Notepad++ updater installed malware 3 weeks ago:
ublock has the same function; it’s the thunderbolt icon, which let’s you just zap away whatever html element offends you!
…no fancy animation tho…is there a plugin that animates the ublock zapper? that would be very fun!
- Comment on Trains cancelled over fake bridge collapse image 3 weeks ago:
exactly!
using a “detector” is how (not all, but a lot of) AIs (LLMs, GenAI) are trained:
have 1 AI that’s a “student”, and 1 that’s a “teacher” and pit them against another until the student fools the teacher nearly 100% of the time. this is what’s usually called “training” an AI.
one can do very funny things with this tech!
for anyone that wants to see this process in action, here’s a great example:
- Comment on Trains cancelled over fake bridge collapse image 3 weeks ago:
afaik, there actually aren’t any reliable tools for this.
the highest accuracy rate I’ve seen reported for “AI detectors” is somewhere around 60%; barely better than a random guess…
- Comment on In wake of Windows 10 retirement, over 780,000 Windows users skip Win 11 for Linux, says Zorin OS developers — distro hits unprecedented 1 million downloads in five weeks 5 weeks ago:
you can just run battlenet through steam:
- add the installer as non-steam game
- set compatibility to proton experimental
- launch/install
- find the filepath for the battlenet .exe
- change the filepath for the target of the battlenet installer to the .exe instead
- never touch it again; it just works!
a tiny bit of effort, but only required once. everything afterwards just works!
- Comment on The FBI spied on a Signal group chat of immigration activists, records reveal 5 weeks ago:
because it’s completely unsubstantiated bullshit?
why would anyone upvote “someone’s feelings” on a technical subject?
this is a technology we’re talking about: there is an objective right and wrong, feelings are irrelevant. especially when those feelings are completely baseless.
the better question is: why would anyone upvote this garbage?
- Comment on Windows 11 could actually become the same kind of mistake Sony made with the PS3 1 month ago:
generally, yes, but it’s a couple more now;
- Austria’s military is moving to open source
- couple of french cities (was is lyon?)
- i think denmark?
- pretty sure there’s a couple others
point being: it’s a clear trend!
it’s slow, yes, but it seems to be picking up steam!
the idea is being seriously discussed at basically all state institutions.
and more importantly: the reason for this trend is clearly data security. which states actually care about. so there’s a very clear and easy to understand incentive, which makes it politically palatable.
we’ll have to see, but the trend seems to be heading in the right direction!
- Comment on What's a recent game you've tried playing that isn't worth the hype? 1 month ago:
similar suggestion to BlackAngels: RimWorld?
sounds like you’d enjoy top-down gameplay more than 1st person, so might be something to try!
pro tip: try the base game first. the DLC are all good, but none are required!
- Comment on Elon Musk says Optimus will 'eliminate poverty' in speech after his $1 trillion pay package was approved 1 month ago:
tesla/spaceX have literal teams whose only job it is to keep this moron from driving the company into the ground.
he’s an idiot.
- Comment on "Very dramatic shift" - Linus Tech Tips opens up about the channel's declining viewership 3 months ago:
there is, maybe, a market for more specialized, niche platforms…but it’s a huge maybe.
nebula seems to be doing very well, but again: highly specialized content, and a closed/curated platform.
other than serving video content, it has little in common with yt…hence the big “maybe”!
and there’s been a few similar attempts in recent years, which i don’t think really went anywhere either…
- Comment on Say hello to Bary 3 months ago:
depends! do you wanna know how the system will evolve over long periods of time?
… then yes!
- Comment on Or Library Genesis 3 months ago:
the downvotes are due to the bullshit “bias” claim.
let’s you know they’re a tankie…
- Comment on The recent Steam censorship debacle actually sort of opened me up to adult games. 4 months ago:
they do mean subverse!
- Comment on The recent Steam censorship debacle actually sort of opened me up to adult games. 4 months ago:
yeah, there’s an inherent problem with that:
in general, people choose adult games explicitly to get off, so putting a bunch of unrelated activities between them and that is not a recipe for success.
or in other words: good gameplay makes for bad porn, and vice versa.
i understand what you are asking for, and the solution for that is modding;
check out loverslab!
the biggest communities (i know of) for this are:
- Skyrim Special Edition
- Fallout 4
- The Sims 4
- RimWorld
all of these have what you’re asking for, with varying levels of integration into the main game!
and since it’s modded content, you even get to decide how much, and what kind of, adult content there is in your game!
and when i say everything is customizable, i mean everything!
so take a look and have fun ;)
- Comment on My petty gripe: forced software updates just make everything worse 4 months ago:
Windows itself already splits those up in security and feature updates…
- Comment on It's on your blood! 4 months ago:
no it’s more like saying “desalinated water is fine, it’s the brine that’s problematic.”
which is true.
and the same goes for teflon:
the PFAS are toxic, not teflon itself.
glossing over that distinction is disingenuous…
yes, you can’t make one without the other, true, but the end product is not toxic. that’s an important difference you can’t just ignore in order to say teflon is toxic, because a requisite material in (cheap) production is toxic.
because that’s like saying desalinated water is toxic, just because brine is toxic…which is obviously ridiculous.
- Comment on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down, but Valve says payment processors 'specifically cited' a Mastercard rule about damaging the brand 4 months ago:
check your email addresses, then check for malware on your system.
that’s definitely not normal…
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 4 months ago:
what a ridiculous idea. that’s not how anything works:
copyright applies to the intellectual property, not the exact file.
so the code itself is the copyrighted thing, not the file you download.
it doesn’t matter whether you download the gpl version, you type out the gpl version by hand, or delete all new code until only gpl code is left.
all you would need to proof is that the code is identical to the gpl code. how you got to that code is completely irrelevant.
you have some fundamental misunderstandings about copyrighted material, intellectual property, and fair use.
most importantly: copyright applies to intellectual property. the idea of a thing, not the physical thing.
so in the case of this emulator, the file and where you got it from is completely irrelevant; only the content of the file, the code, has any meaning. which means any files that contain the same code are identical in the eyes of the law, regardless of how you got them.
copyright is not a contract, but a license. and a license is a manual that explains how intellectual property (the idea of a thing, not the physical thing) is allowed to be used by someone. it’s not specific to an individual, which is why contracts have to be signed by both parties. so no, you don’t have a contract and no obligation to adhere to the new one at all. you can choose to use the old license, as long as you don’t use any of the new code.
unless you want to modify and/or distribute the new code, the license (CC-BY-NC-ND) is irrelevant for the user.
and you can modify your own private copy as much as you want, you just can’t distribute it, or modify and use it in a way that is illegal in some other way. but that’s about it.
and all of this applies to both US and german law.
and none of this is remotely relevant, because the gpl version is still available for download!
nothing got replaced, so the gpl license is very much still applicable to that version of the software!
“new” does not mean that the old version went anywhere; it’s still around. and you can still use, modify, and distribute it under the gpl.
- Comment on Tea app leak worsens with second database exposing user chats 5 months ago:
for “this dude” to have any meaning to anyone, there needs to be a name attached at the very least.
that alone is personal information.
personal information is any information that can be used to uniquely identify a natural person.
this app was nothing but personal information being deliberately spread without the persons consent.
man am i glad this sort of bullshit isn’t even up for discussion in the EU…what an absolute nightmare for privacy…
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 5 months ago:
yes, correct, assuming a solo project!
thank you for the correction.
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 5 months ago:
yes and no:
the copyright owner can do whatever they want, but they can’t really revoke a GPL license. that’s not really a thing.
and the part about
If you obtained your copy under the old license you can use it under the old license when you obtain a new copy you have a new license agreement.
seems to me like you are implying that “use under the old license” means “run the program on my own machine”, but that’s not true, since GPL explicitly allows redistribution and modification.
under a GPL license, you effectively give up control over your software voluntarily:
The GNU General Public Licenses are a series of widely used free software licenses, or copyleft licenses, that guarantee end users the freedom to run, study, share, or modify the software.
(highlighted the relevant portion for your convenience)
this makes revoking the license effectively impossible.
you could continue development under a different license, but that gets legally tricky very quickly.
for example: all the code previously under GPL, stays under GPL. so if someone where to modify those parts of the code and redistribute it as a patch, you couldn’t legally do anything about that.
which seems to be what the OOP claims the change to a CC-BY-NC-ND forbids, apparently misunderstanding, that this new license only applies to code added to the repo since the license change, not the code from before the license change.
- Comment on Duckstation(one of the most popular PS1 Emulators) dev plans on eventually dropping Linux support due to Linux users, especially Arch Linux users. 5 months ago:
yes you can!
…for new versions. not for already released ones.
at least not with most common copyleft/open source licenses.
- Comment on Women’s ‘red flag’ app Tea is a privacy nightmare 5 months ago:
i mean…an app directly copying a black mirror episode (but almost exclusively targeting a specific demographic) does ring some very, VERY loud alarm bells…
like, this is literally the plot of nosedive.
it’s a social credit system.
and none of the people even know they HAVE a score, so it’s somehow even worse than the fictional scenario.
this will, absolutely, hurt innocents and it will do so by design.
“fuck them innocents!”…just because they happen to be men?
how is that anything other than misandrist?
how is that defensible?
how is doxxing, mass libel, and targeted harassment a solution to sexism and rape culture?
I’d be really interested in hearing anything about how this is supposed to help women, because i struggle to see how sowing massive, unearned distrust between men and women is going to make anyone any safer…
I’m really, REALLY glad that the GDPR would nuke this sort of nonsense from orbit…uploading pictures of strangers, for the explicit purpose of gossiping about them behind their backs, spreading awful rumors?
what. the. actual. fuck. is wrong with you people?
and i don’t mean women, or men, i mean americans and their total disregard for privacy and digital safety. what the hell…