Yeah. I hear you there. Problem I usually have is that the odds of an accusation tend to scale less with posting style in my experience and more with level of disagreement, or whether or not the poster has personally witnessed something. Basically, “I didn’t see this with my own two eyes/dislike you, so this is obviously bot behavior.” It’s a conspiracy theorist-like attitude, and it’s predated LLMs entirely.

Nonetheless, I’m not happy that an entire new form of bot scrutiny has been introduced, and I absolutely cannot wait for GenAI/LLM hype to die the fuck down.

And more! The current discontent at the Democrat Party and the pushes for reforming it have all the more chance of success if the Republicans start fracturing at the same time.

I honestly have no idea how to respond to this. Did you read my comment and its context? Because I can’t figure out what point you’re even trying to make, so it really feels like you didn’t.

I swear to God, some people these days will cry bot if someone so much as blinks unexpectedly. Chill.

If you want to shit on America the country, I’m with you. I could hardly disagree with the top comment in this chain; America is, after all, racist, bigoted and fascist right now. The nation, and especially the government, deserve all the vitriol.

But please don’t shit on Americans writ large. Too many of us hate this just as much as you do, and we really don’t appreciate being lumped in with those who enabled it.

there’s a full third who had a choice and refused to do anything

We’ve got at least two options for blame when it comes to the last election:

• Politicians who wield actual power and use it to do nothing (at best)
• Voters, largely struggling to survive, wielding little power, even in aggregate, due to a rigged system

I live for the day people blame the former instead of the latter, though I know I’ll never see it.

I misremembered it as being about Iran back then too, but yeah. It’s the War on Terror excuse all over again.

Iran

having nukes

Experts disagree

Man, where have I heard this one before?

Interesting. I feel like the headline is still bad though. I get why they ran with it, at least — “ChatGPT finds kernel exploit” is more interesting and gets more clicks than “Monkey finally writes Shakespeare.”

but this proved that it could be used as a useful tool for helping to detect vulnerabilities.

I think “could” is doing some heavy lifting there.

The company has also warned Microsoft that if its “move fast and break things” ideology impacts the foundation of privacy-preserving apps like Signal, the app may drop support for Windows altogether in the future.

Ooo-hoo-hoo! Now that’s spicy. I like it.

Don’t feed the troll, folks.

And that’s making them larger and “think."

Isn’t that the two big strings to the bow of LLM development these days? If those don’t work, how isn’t it the case that hallucinations “are here to stay”?

Sure, it might theoretically happen that some new trick is devised that fixes the issue, and I’m sure that will happen eventually, but there’s no promise of it being anytime even remotely soon.

Yes, and? The money Gates makes from capital he owns comes from somewhere, and I firmly believe that it comes disproportionately from the poor, as that is how America tends to work. So for all he may or may not donate, that money is circulating right back to him. It’s like if a slumlord “donated” $200 to you right before rent was due. You might find it preferential to not getting a de facto $200 discount on rent that month, but he’s still a slumlord and nothing about the “donation” makes him ethical.

As for being better than Musk, I really don’t care. “Better than a Nazi” is not a defense.

Yeah, I’ve seen this trick before. And I have a feeling he’ll be “earning” many billions in the same time period; how much I don’t know, but I’m cynical enough that I wouldn’t be surprised if the answer was “more than he donates.”

You’re just as dishonest as the last one.

I understand why you’re frustrated, but you’ve got to realize that the presence of resources that can break you out of bad thinking doesn’t mean it’s easy to break out of bad thinking, nor does it absolve those who duped you into the bad thinking in the first place. Cults work for a reason.

Just as an example, consider how hard it is to:

• Find time to learn when you’re struggling to work enough to afford rent
• Find a way to learn that works for you if you’re disabled
• Consider your thinking to be in need of challenge when everyone you listen to tells you otherwise, and you trust them
• Listen to opposing viewpoints when you have thorough hatred for the people telling you them

This is just a smattering of ways a path out of broken thinking can be more fraught than it looks. There are plenty more, so even in cases where these specific ones don’t apply, that doesn’t mean the person in question is intentionally ignorant or malicious.

If you’re angry, be angry. I don’t judge that whatsoever. I only ask that you be angry at the people deliberately trying to make everything worse, rather than the those who they’re tricking. Get mad at the influencers, not the audience.

I agree. My problem now is that people like Tlaib were who I looked to for how things could change, and yet here they are enabling worse instead of fighting for better. I can’t square that circle, and it means I’m losing one of the last bastions of hope I had for a better world.

I agree with your second paragraph, and find your third to be understandable (though I would contend that propaganda has been a problem for a long time now and wasn’t made meaningfully worse by tech, just different). Where I lose you completely though is this comment’s first statement.

Neither of your other points stated here back up a lack of empathy. In fact, they counter it, as you’ve provided two far better things to get mad at. I hope you haven’t abandoned empathy because it didn’t change minds, because empathy isn’t supposed to be contingent on getting people to agree with you.

I’m aware. My point was that this wasn’t a majority even besides that. Not sure why you seem to be phrasing this as a counterpoint, though, given that it reinforces my comment?

I said most of what I wanted to say in this comment, but I’d like to take an extra moment here to point out that you are currently making excuses for fascists.

Putting it bluntly, I don’t give a flying fuck how many people voted for Trump – which wasn’t the majority, by the way, since not everyone votes – there is no amount of votes that makes “doing fascism” okay. Trump is not a force of nature. He does not get absolved of blame. This rests on his shoulders more than anyone.