mfed1122

@mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why do neurotypicals like AI slop?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  As others have pointed out, I don’t think you have solid evidence to suspect that this is a neurotypical vs ADHD thing. Personally I think it’s just a matter of poor taste. The sad truth is most people cannot appreciate good art, and the only reason why most works of art are as high quality as they are is because artists make them, and artists do appreciate good art and have high standards. From the artists point of view, their piece needs to meet criteria X, Y, Z, etc. to be a good satisfying piece. But from the point of view of the tasteless plebian masses, it probably only needs to meet criteria X. I first noticed this when I saw that almost every highly upvoted artwork on Reddit years ago was a really hyper realistic pencil drawing, usually of a pretty girl. Most people don’t appreciate form, composition, subtle meanings, abstraction, etc. Those things require more thinking and are therefore too difficult for many people to engage with. Instead, “how hard does this seem to make” and “how much do I like this at first glance” become the proxy standards used by tasteless lazy people to judge art, and hence the “best” art by those standards is a super realistic pencil drawing of a pretty woman became “zomg I thought this was a photo!!!” and “I couldn’t do this in a million years!!! So impressive!!!” As if the point of art is just to flex on people? But it gets worse, because even when people decide to half-ass their ingestion of art by flattening it down to a single dimension of “how realistic is it”, again, because people aren’t artists and have never even tried to engage in art (and this I actually don’t hold against them, unlike their prior laziness), they don’t have a trained eye. So sometimes you’ll see just a mediocre pencil drawing of a pretty girl, and people with less art skills will be like “wow 10/10 it’s perfect!!!”, but people with art skills will be able to notice things like “well if the shadow on the neck is like that the shadow on the nose should be going the other way, you mixed up your light sources”, or “the perspective is off on the angle of the eyes here”. Sometimes these improvements would be subconsciously picked up by the masses, but many times not. Often the subtleties that make an artwork go from mediocre to amazing are lost on the masses. As a result, the masses are equally satisfied with poor quality AI-generated images as they are with high quality human-generated images.

  TLDR; The lack of media literacy among many people strikes again

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"We approached payment processors because Steam did not respond" - Australian pressure group Collective Shout claims responsibility for Steam and Itch.io NSFW game removal⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for taking the time to put those resources together for me.

  That’s absolutely crazy, my goodness… Some people really are insane when it comes to sex. It reminds me a bit of how you can show soft penises in American TV to some extent without it being considered pornographic, but hard penises are pornographic. But this labia issue makes even less sense than that, because it doesn’t depend on arousal. What a backwards situation

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"We approached payment processors because Steam did not respond" - Australian pressure group Collective Shout claims responsibility for Steam and Itch.io NSFW game removal⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Never heard about this, what are you referring to?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Itch.io apologise for "frustration and confusion" after delisting thousands of NSFW projects⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  We need zines to be a bigger thing again

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s so dainty 🥺 yeah, far from the norm here I’m ashamed to say

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That would probably be a “small” at most fast food drive thrus here. Also, nobody orders a small unless they’re on a “diet”. Generally everyone gets a large, which looks like this here: www.gettyimages.com/detail/…/145545668

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  How many times do we have to teach you this lesson, Mickey7? Stop posting this shitty boomer Facebook humor that is neither accurate nor funny. I understand this is likely a bot account, but maybe whoever manages it will see: We aren’t falling for it. Save your electricity and go post this trash on Reddit

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨As an American, I'm offended at AliExpress' portrayal of my people.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  All joking aside, the cup really is too small and the burger really is too lettucey to look authentically American, 100% seriously

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Please fix this site - Pay so the site gets fixed⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Really missed an opportunity to have an element greater than 100% of the screen width causing horizontal scroll into an empty white space to the right of the page

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Sounded great when I was young⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Cease posting

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah this is exactly what turned me off from it when I looked into it. I kind of like that it would lend a more physical-space quality to it, but ultimately I’m hardly ever online, so it would just be me being totally out of the loop all the time without a bouncer. I know I could figure out how to do it, but it’s a lot of effort for something where I’m not even sure I’ll like what it gives me.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨coping⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Absolutely there is, but unfortunately the solution to CP is having moderators who can delete content, and that alone is enough to cause all the problems with moderators. It seems largely intractable to me. The only thing I could see maybe working is some system where moderators can be removed by community vote, but then you rely on systems preventing fake accounts from being created or account age to stop those votes from being botted, etc… I just don’t see how to technically solve the problem of moderators having power to delete things. It’s the classic issue of who watches the watchmen. Humanity has never had a great solution to this.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨coping⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The problem is that if you actually have no or insufficient moderation then people just start using the site to post child pornography. And then you visiting what used to be a site you like becomes basically illegal and dangerous, not to mention potentially traumatizing. I’m not exaggerating, there was a small game fan forum site I used to love along with many others, but someone caught on to the fact it was run by just one guy and kept signing up with fake accounts and posting child porn or links to it. Luckily I had already fallen off using the site by then, but one of my Internet friends who still visited it kept me updated on the drama. First everyone normal stopped visiting. Then it eventually got so bad the owner had to shut down the site.

  People lack imagination when it comes to what will happen with no moderation. It quickly becomes horrible.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Danish Ministry switching from Microsoft Office/365 to LibreOffice⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah same. I respect the huge amount of work it takes to make a suite like that, but… I’m lucky I’ve worked with Blender a lot to give me a good impression of open source software. If Libre was my first thing I experimented with in the open source world (and I think for many, many people it probably is), I would probably think “wow open source software is a joke, I guess you get what you pay for after all”. It really makes a horrible impression. I wonder why LibreOffice has so many usability pains vs Blender, despite the fact that both applications have very high demand. Maybe it’s just that LibreOffice seems really dull to contribute to?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨‘I blame Facebook’: Aaron Sorkin is writing a Social Network sequel for the post-Zuckerberg era⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Post-Zuckerberg? I’m confused on the eras of Facebook I guess. He’s still CEO isn’t he? Wouldn’t that make the whole history of the company the Zuckerberg era?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Next-Gen Brain Implants Offer New Hope for Depression: AI and real-time neural feedback could transform treatments⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Those are some good nuances that definitely require a nuanced response and forced me to refine my thinking, thank you! I’m actually not claiming that the brain is the sole boundary of the real me, rather it is the majority of me, but my body is a contributor. The real me does change as my body changes, just in less meaningful ways. Likewise some changes in the brain change the real me more than others. However, regardless of what constitutes the real me or not, (and believe me, the philosophical rabbit hole there is one I love to explore), in this case I’m really just talking about the straightforward immediate implications of a brain implant on my privacy. An arm implant would also be quite bad in this regard, but a brain implant is clearly worse.

  There have already been systems that can display very rough, garbled images of what people are thinking of. I’m less worried about an implant that tells me what to do or controls me directly, and more worried about an implant that has a pretty accurate picture of my thoughts and reports it to authorities. It’s surely possible to build a system that can approximate positive or negative mood states, and in combination this is very dangerous. If the government can tell that I’m happy when I think about Luigi Mangione, then they can respond to that information however they want. Eventually, in the same way that I am conditioned by the panopticon to stop at stop sign, even in the middle of a desolate desert where I can see for miles around that there are no cars, no police, no cameras - no anything that could possibly make a difference to me running the stop sign - the system will similarly condition automatic compliance in thoughts themselves. That is, compliance is brought about not by any actual exertion of power or force, but merely by the omnipresent possibility of its exertion.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Next-Gen Brain Implants Offer New Hope for Depression: AI and real-time neural feedback could transform treatments⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I am not depressed, but I will never get a brain implant for any reason. The brain is the final frontier of privacy, it is the one place I am free. If that is taken away I am no longer truly autonomous, I am no longer truly myself.

  I understand this is how older generations feel about lots of things, like smartphones, which I am writing this from, and I understand how stupid it sounds to say “but this is different!”, but like… really. This is different. Whatever scale smartphones, drivers licenses, personalized ads, the internet, smart home speakers… whatever scale all these things lie on in terms of “panopticon-ness”, a brain implant is so exponentially further along that scale as to make all the others vanish to nothingness. You can’t top a brain implant. A brain implant is fundamentally unspeakable horror which would inevitably be used to subjugate entire peoples in a way so systematically flawless as to be almost irreversible.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A woman tried to call her mom in Iran. A robotic voice answered the phone⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ll be very interested to some day figure out what the explanation for this is. It’s extremely bizarre and very creepy. Also, it’s crazy that Internet access can just be whisked away so easily by the government. I guess satellite is just about the only way around that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Luv Me Chips, 'ate Seagulls...⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I think there is a substantial difference though. Meat processing is done in a measured, considered way for a benefit (meat) that cannot be obtained without killing the animal. It is done in isolated facilities away from people who find the process disturbing. Just because people find something gross doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done - we have sewage maintenance done out of the public eye too - but it does maybe mean it should be done where people don’t have to see it. The only benefit this man gets from killing the animal is some sort of “revenge”. But this is in principle completely contradictory to meat processing, where animals are seen as less capable of higher order experiences and therefore more acceptable to kill. To seek revenge, you would need to be assigning more higher order experience to the seagull than we typically see it as having. You have to see the seagull as selfish, stealing, criminal, rude, etc., even though in reality a more reasonable person understands that it’s just an animal looking for food. Meat processing is not done out of some emotional vendetta against the animals, rather it is the cold detachment of it that is exactly what makes it acceptable. Can you imagine if we killed the same amount of chickens every day, not to eat them, but just because we hate them? This is much more horrifying! Because that would mean we think chickens are having complex enough inner experiences to warrant hatred, yet still we kill them.

  Meat processing maybe isn’t great, but it’s still much better than this seagull killer. It isn’t impulsive, it isn’t disproportionate in response to the situation, it acknowledges and conceals its own horrors; thereby paying respect to important social codes. The actions of this man, though, disregarded the well-being of children and others around him, in an impulsive and disproportionate response - your average meat-eater is indeed better than that, I think. When I have a craving for some meat, I don’t drag a calf down to the nearest playground, cut it in half and spray blood over the children, and proceed to mock the calf’s weakness and inferiority as I beat it to tenderize it before consumption. I just want some food, dude. But what’s this guy’s beef? It’s not beef, and it’s not even seagull meat, but rather some frightening notion of swift and decisive revenge, which reveals that he is just waiting for any excuse to get away with brutalizing things around him.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Vomiting Emoji⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I love the antigravity vomit coming out of the bottom half of the mouth.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  In the same sense that some users might post only articles about ICE in California, or only articles about hurricanes in Florida, I still think that’s not very strange. Some people are particularly invested in specific topics. Maybe the author is or is close to rape victims and is therefore especially interested in it. People dedicate their whole lives and careers to specific activist topics, so I don’t think it’s too strange for someone to dedicate most of their posting activity on one particular website to one. Anyways, I’m not sure what the ulterior motive would be here anyways - what do you think is the real reason for posting so many articles about rape?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  But reasoning about it is intelligent, and the point of this study is to determine the extent to which these models are reasoning or not. Which again, has nothing to do with emotions. And furthermore, my initial question about whether or not pattern following should automatically be disqualified as intelligence, as the person summarizing this study (and notably not the study itself) claims, is the real question here.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Sorry, I can see why my original post was confusing, but I think you’ve misunderstood me. I’m not claiming that I know the way humans reason. In fact you and I are on total agreement that it is unscientific to assume hypotheses without evidence. This is exactly what I am saying is the mistake in the statement “AI doesn’t actually reason, it just follows patterns”. That is unscientific if we don’t know whether or “actually reasoning” consists of following patterns, or something else. As far as I know, the jury is out on the fundamental nature of how human reasoning works. It’s my personal, subjective feeling that human reasoning works by following patterns. But I’m not saying “AI does actually reason like humans because it follows patterns like we do”. Again, I see how what I said could have come off that way. What I mean more precisely is:

  It’s not clear whether AI’s pattern-following techniques are the same as human reasoning, because we aren’t clear on how human reasoning works. My intuition tells me that humans doing pattern following seems equally as valid of an initial guess as humans not doing pattern following, so shouldn’t we have studies to back up the direction we lean in one way or the other?

  I think you and I are in agreement, we’re upholding the same principle but in different directions.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  But for something like solving a Towers of Hanoi puzzle, which is what this study is about, we’re not looking for emotional judgements - we’re trying to evaluate the logical reasoning capabilities. A sociopath would be equally capable of solving logic puzzles compared to a non-sociopath. In fact, simple computer programs do a great job of solving these puzzles, and they certainly have nothing like emotions. So I’m not sure that emotions have any relevance to the topic of AI or human reasoning and problem solving.

  As for analogizing LLMs to sociopaths, I think that’s a bit odd too. The reason why we (stereotypically) find sociopathy concerning is that a person has their own desires which, in combination with a disinterest in others’ feelings, incentivizes them to be deceitful or harmful in some scenarios. But LLMs are largely designed specifically as servile, having no will or desires of their own. If people find it concerning that LLMs imitate emotions, then I think we’re giving them far too much credit as sentient autonomous beings - and this is coming from someone who thinks they think in the same way we do! The think like we do, IMO, but they lack a lot of the other subsystems that are necessary for an entity to function in a way that can be considered as autonomous/having free will/desires of its own choosing, etc.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I believe it. He’s posting news from his local area. Nobody questions it if a Californian Lemmy user posts a lot of California specific news, and rightly so - it makes sense to do that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple just proved AI "reasoning" models like Claude, DeepSeek-R1, and o3-mini don't actually reason at all.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  This sort of thing has been published a lot for awhile now, but why is it assumed that this isn’t what human reasoning consists of? Isn’t all our reasoning ultimately a form of pattern memorization? I sure feel like it is. So to me all these studies that prove they’re “just” memorizing patterns don’t prove anything, unless coupled with research on the human brain to prove we do something different.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Sorry, my examples maybe didn’t make clear what my issue with the post is. The fact that public support for Israel in Western Europe is at the lowest point ever recorded, is not really a “YSK”, it’s not a piece of advice or tip that I can use in my daily life. It’s good information, but it belongs under News, or Politics. It’s not, as the sidebar says “things that can make your life easier”, unless you went to argue that it psychologically makes my life easier, in which case then I can fit just about anything into this community, in which case why do I even have the community? If everything belongs in the community, then the community may as well not exist.

  Just think of how much better and more honest this post would have been if it had been made in a news with a title that was just the title of the article and then a link to the article. But by being posted here in this manner, it comes across as engagement bait - and yes, the title is definitely contributing to that. Is it really news to anyone that people don’t like genocidal murderous bastards? Is that really something “I should know”?

  Technically anything that’s news could also be posted here, if we take the definition of the community at its most literal level. But if that’s the case, why should we have a separate news community and a ysk community? Clearly, there should be some sort of distinction between things that belong in ysk versus in the various news communities.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  But in all practicality, every Lemmy user already knows about Israeli genocidal behavior in Gaza. If every community just becomes format-differentiated reposts of the same stuff, all of Lemmy becomes one big content-blob.

  Even if I totally agree that, for example, Elon Musk is obnoxious, and I want to hear some news that he got punched in the face - I don’t want to open Lemmy and see:

  You should know Elon Musk got punched in the face Mildly interesting: Elon Musk got punched in the face Mildly infuriating: Whoever punched Elon Musk in the face didn’t punch him hard enough Map porn: Countries where Elon Musk has been punched in the face Gaming: Would you play a Punch Elon Musk In The Face Simulator? Am I the asshole: for thinking Elon Musk deserved to be punched in the face? Programmer Humor: if(isElonMusk){punchedInFace = True;} Privacy: If it’s illegal to punch Elon in the face why is it punch my privacy in the face with tracking? LinuxMemes: sudo punch Elon Musk in face Uplifting news: Elon Musk punched in face Depressing news: Elon Musk not punched twice in face Television: Just watched this character get punched in the face. Remind you of anyone? Classic Rock: “Facepunch” - 1982 Piracy: Links to movies where billionaires get punched in the face?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I love this comment so much. One of the biggest things that destroyed the quality of Reddit, although this is almost never talked about, was the trend of shoehorning the same topic into every subreddit, no matter how niche. Then to make matters worse, people will insist on leaving the post in an unsuitable just because they like the sentiment of the post. But over time this means that the purpose of communities completely breaks down, and the whole site just becomes “different formats for us all to express the same take on the same current event”. Absolutely insidious. Entire purpose of communities is so that people can customize their experience and see different types of content depending on what they’re interested in. Forcing the same topic into every community not only makes the service insufferable, but it also means there’s no point to joining small communities or contributing to them. You devolve to everyone just looking at the top most popular stuff, because all they would see anywhere else is just cutesy forced variants on that same thing anyways. Do not force topics into every community.

  Again: Do not force topics into every community.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Mom sues porn sites (Including Chaturbate, Jerkmate, Superporn and Hentaicity) for noncompliance with Kansas age assurance law; Teen can no longer enjoy life after mom caught him visiting Chaturbate⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  So then can anything that produces dopamine be addictive? Can I get addicted to hugging my girlfriend, or addicted to reading books, or jogging? Or is there some threshold? Does the intensity per time matter, or just the intensity, or just the time? What about the frequency of exposure? Does any amount of dopamine release make me slightly more addicted to whatever it is, or is there some threshold that needs to be exceeded? Do dopamine-based addictions produce physical withdrawal symptoms, always, never, sometimes? Depending on what? And are physical withdrawal symptoms necessary to constitute addiction or are there different tiers of addiction?

  You see what I’m getting at. There’s sooo many questions that need to be answered before just saying “this produces lots of dopamine therefore it’s addictive and bad and should be limited”. While I appreciate and empathize with your sentiment about people cherry-picking the studies they like (sounding like an LLM here lol), it’s not as if science doesn’t know how to deal with that problem, and it certainly isn’t a reason to stop caring about or citing studies at all, or say “well you’ve got your studies and I’ve got mine”. Just because both sides have studies that give evidence in their favor doesn’t mean both sides are equally valid or that it’s impossible to reach an informed conclusion one way or the other.

  My next biggest question (and what I’m trying to drive at with the semi-rhetorical slew of questions I opened with) would be what makes something an addiction or not? Am I addicted to staying alive, because I’ll do anything to stay alive as long as possible? That seems silly to call an addiction, since it doesn’t do any harm. And how do we delineate between, say, someone who is addicted to playing with Rubik’s Cubes vs. someone who just really likes Rubik’s Cubes and has poor self-control? Or what about someone with some other mental quirk, like someone who plays with Rubik’s Cubes a lot due to OCD, or maybe an autistic person who plays a lot with Rubik’s Cubes out of a special interest? Does the existence of such people mean that “Rubik’s Cube Addiction” is a real concern that can happen to anyone who plays with Rubik’s Cubes too much? Or perhaps Rubik’s cubes are not addictive at all, and it is separate traits driving people to engage with them in a way that appears addictive to others.

  I know I’ve written a long post and asked lots of questions. It’s not my intention to “gish gallop” you, just to convey my variety of questions. The Rubik’s example is the one thing I’m most curious to hear your thoughts on. (There I go sounding like an LLM again)