Skip Navigation

Posts
6
Comments
678
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Rule

    Jump
  • There's a point I've heard that the kind of slop that gen AI can be used for is good for fascists, because they're not trying to say anything or make it cohesive, they just want a glut of vague sentiments they're agreeable to, and gen AI can give them that without having to deal with pesky artists who have thoughts of their own like, "what you want is bad, actually," "maybe fuck you," and "I will stab you in the eye with my pencil."

  • I've never understood this idea of having an etiquette telling people how they "should" use their vote. If voting means anything, then people get to use their vote however they want. They can do it by dice roll if they feel like it.

    Now remember, if you dislike this comment, according to your own logic, that's not a good reason to downvote it.

  • You are not worth talking to.

  • People are being miseducated about what they can achieve by charlatans looking to make a quick buck before the hype bubble implodes, and the tech is helping cook the planet.

    It's not "fine".

  • Which is also not a real use-case. Like, just check your work, you don't need a tool for that.

    Hell I don't even use spell-check because it's just distracting, and it's a fundamentally wrong way to think about language.

  • I don't remember those being particularly emphasised traits of his.

  • That is not what the paper means by "interest groups".

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Excrubulently.

  • I'm not sure what the venn diagram of people into mutual aid and people who buy scratch tickets looks like, but I'd suspect it's a small overlap.

    But hey who knows, if this stuff is getting more popular traction then I might be wrong about that.

  • There's a guide out there about what to do if you win.

    Basically, tell nobody before you talk to a senior partner in a big law firm, get trusts set up for yourself and the people in your life so everybody is looked after and you can't fall below a decent living wage even if you fuck the rest up. This also stops people hounding you for a slice and destroying your relationships.

    Then there was stuff about setting up investments, and setting aside some spending cash.

    Personally I'd want to put most of the "investments" into various mutual aid projects to build lasting social stability rather than using it to further the stock market, but other than that it's pretty good advice.

  • I'm not going to get a meaningful exchange with you, I can already tell. I think I made that pretty clear, as well as my reasons. Your reply is empty of anything but a very unsubtle attempt at emotional manipulation, so I'd say I've made the right call.

  • It's not about force or having authority to define something, this is about being able to have a real conversation, and you left the main term undefined except in your own mind, and then when I asked you for it you gave an absolutely wild definition that makes no sense and which I can't find anybody else using, and yet you still called it "the" definition and not "your" definition.

    If nothing else that means you're not someone it's worth trying to talk to, because you're not even trying to communicate effectively. I don't care if you have your reasons, they're not good reasons but I feel like in the spirit of this conversation I just shouldn't fucking bother to explain why, because based on precedent you'll just insist I'm wrong for your own inscrutable reasons and carry on as you were, and if I try to wrest those reasons out of you they'll be nonsensical. Also you're not worth trying to convince because you're not somebody anyone else will listen to for long before they realise you're completely full of shit.

    Goodbye.

  • That definition of authority is so immediately, obviously wrong that I don't even know where to start dealing with it.

    It's so uselessly broad. I literally said at the start that authority isn't just any inqeuality, and you didn't address it. You should have if you thought that was wrong, because that's literally the definition of the thing that we're talking about.

    I would like to see you justify this incrsdibly broad definition. If you want to see my justification for my definition, I would invite you to look it up in any dictionary.

  • I need you to define the word "authority" in that case. I've given my definition, so what is yours and how does it differ, please? Because I already addressed the fact that an imbalance doesn't create a hierarchy, and your description of imbalance does not fit my definition of authority.

    Power imbalance doesn't automatically create the conditions for domination. For that you would need both expertise and monopoly.

    And the solution to a misunderstanding isn't to concede the definition of the word "state" but to educate. The state is any entity that has a monopoly of the legitimate use of violence in a region. That applies regardless of the system of government that rules it.

    Your definition isn't a definition, it's just a collection of categories that gives no useful information.

    We don't need to be dominated in order to clean up our garbage. And the state is often really bad at collecting garbage, so just teach people that.

  • I honestly hate the concept of "bootmaker authority", because it's exactly the same wrong conflation that Engels makes. Not every inequality is a form of authority. Expertise is not authority, it is expertise.

    Authority is the socially-recognised power to dominate. Getting a bootmaker to advise on or perform bootmaking tasks is not domination. The bootmaker can't hold you at gunpoint and command you to wear a certain kind of boot, nobody would allow that. There aren't bootmaking cops.

    Like what exactly does the bootmaker's "authority" entail in this theory? Giving consent does not confer authority. Authority operates regardless of consent, that's what makes it bad.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Because evil is loud and self-important, and people doing good have learned to be mycelial, underground, quietly building the new world in the shell of the old.

  • That's very laggy for me, whereas my lemmy app, voyager, is extremely smooth.

    It's building a general purpose UI as a webpage which then has to be interpreted via your browser which then serves the UI up to you. Because this browser has to handle literally whatever is being thrown at it at all times, there is a lot of overhead and extra processes running to make it work correctly.

    All of the graphics are equivalent, every line between every element, every button, every image is represented in the same data that the text is, so the phone is interpreting and rendering many times more stuff.

    In contrast, a native app takes the bare text & media data and renders it in native controls, so the phone is able take a tiny amount of data and fit it into a template that renders natively on the phone. It's doing orders of magnitude less work.

  • They're not just browsers, they're accessing the posts via an API and presenting it in a bespoke manner with purpose-built controls.

    That's good because it's faster and lower-data than a webpage, and it's easier and faster to use on mobile.

    Not every app is just a web browser, that's a particular kind of lazy app created by the app hype bubble like 20 years ago.