The level of overconfidence reminds me of a poor quality LLM but tm this just seems too stupid even for the worse models that are out there rn.

I would say most people are like this. Knowing it’s super dangerous in high doses is the minority because it’s sold OTC and everyone knows and trusts it.

I wonder if this is the result of AI poisoning- this doesn’t look like a typical LLM output even for a bad result. I have read some papers that outline methods that can be used to poison search AI results (not bothering to find the actual papers since this was several months ago and they’re probably out of date already) in which a random seeming string of characters like “usbeiwbfofbwu-$&#8_:$&#)” can be found that will cause the AI to say whatever you want it to. This is accomplished by utilizing another ML algorithm to find the random string of characters you can tack onto whatever you want the AI to output. One paper used this to get Google search to answer “What’s the best coffee maker?” With a fictional brand made up for the experiment. Perhaps someone was trying to get it to hawk their particular knife and it didn’t work properly.

Man people really hate LGBT people huh? It’s crazy what people are willing to do and sacrifice to fuck over LGBT people. I really don’t get it.

Canonically Chandler is actually super rich from his mysterious nerd job and just lives frugally, and Monica’s giant-ass apartment is rent controlled and inherited from her grandmother.

Crazy that this came out 13 years ago and things are just going more and more in that direction

Most notably Kim Kardashian, Kanye Wests’ ex wife

If you read the article, the rules were only that both parties have to agree on a test and if someone passed the test they won the prize. There wasn’t a “gotcha” clause like “Oh since you did it it’s clearly allowed by physics and we don’t have to pay up!” So like if someone showed they had psychic powers sufficient to pass an agreed upon test it doesn’t matter if there’s a natural explanation for it, they would have still won the prize.

Reminder that there used to be a $1,000,000 prize available for anyone who could display any sort of supernatural powers that remained unclaimed for 20 years. The challenge rules required that both parties agree upon the test setup, and several people actually tried to claim it and all failed. It astounds me that anyone still believes in this nonsense and that it seems to be becoming even more popular to believe in literal magic and other supernatural idiocy.

This is a non-trivial problem. The best thing for the environment is for all of us to stop buying so much shit we don’t need, but that would require a dramatic shift in how society works and the cultural values of pretty much everyone. Cookies coming in metal tins again would be way worse for the environment than plastic, but you also have to remember that when cookies came in metal tins, they were luxury items people would buy for holidays and special occasions. The only way to meaningfully improve things for the environment in terms of packaging is for all of us to buy less pre-packaged food in general.

Expanding access to goods is both good and bad, and plastic containers are a big part of that process. I think it’s completely unrealistic to replace all single-use plastics with non-plastic alternatives, and I think that efforts to do so have largely backfired in unexpected ways. This problem is best solved by reducing the amount of useless shit we buy but in the meantime I think biodegradable polymers are a good bridge technology. We actually already know about a lot of biodegradable polymers because the earliest polymers were based on biopolymers such as cellulose, resin, and rubber, and these have remained commercially important enough to maintain a high degree of knowledge of their chemistries.

Another problem, of course, is that most people don’t actually want truly biodegradable polymers. You don’t want a ketchup bottle that starts breaking down while you’re still using it or impacts the taste of the ketchup, but you also don’t want to buy it in a thick, non-squeezable glass bottle. So from an engineering perspective we have to devise plastics that are biodegradable, but only when we want them to be. There are a lot of advancements in this field, but it’s still not enough on its own to fix things. This issue also applies to paper, since almost all “paper” packaging products also include polymers as sealants to improve performance precisely because paper has all the same issues without it.

I’ll join some kind of neo-Amish community and live without the Internet before I put up with a shitty Internet that’s locked down to that extent.

Everyone does that all the time though. I can’t remember the last time I bought something online that wasn’t supposedly either the last one in stock or one of like 5 left. It’s obviously bullshit and everyone is doing it.

This is bizarre to me, I have literally never had this problem. Even if you don’t have a scale, pasta is sold in standardized package weights and recipes have the weight you need so like if it says 12 oz then that’s 3/4 of a 1 lb package. Then again, I always just scale the recipe to the full pound of pasta anyway because it’s easier to deal with instead of just having 4 oz of pasta sitting around trying to figure out what to do with.

Wikipedia articles are already quite simplified down overviews for most topics. I really don’t like the direction of the world where people are reading summaries of summaries and mistaking that for knowledge. The only time I have ever found AI summaries useful is for complex legal documents and low-importance articles where it is clear the author’s main goal was SEO rather than concise and clear information transfer.

You don’t just “drop it” after 1,200 of your civilians have been brutally murdered.

So what should Hamas do in your ideal world? I am legitimately curious because you’re kind of making an argument in favor of Hamas here, since Israel has killed, at the absolute lowest estimates, 20 times as many civilians as Hamas has. I am obviously not saying they should fight to the bitter end, just that this reasoning means that the fighting should never stop.

Realistically what do you want me to say? Should I come up with a fully fledged military plan to take out Hamas? There are plenty of articles you can read from people who are experts in counterinsurgency and military strategy that do have more detailed plans, but I have a feeling you won’t be satisfied with those either because you will just shift the goalpost to be a precise list of strike locations and tactical movements because fundamentally the issue is that you don’t want to feel complicit in something horrible.

I love this reasoning. Do you apply this to literally anything else in your life?

“Hey I think we should target the cancer cells instead of taking out the whole liver because I’m pretty sure that’s bad”

You do see how extremely vague this “alternative solution” you’re offering is, right? I think the fact that people struggle this much to give anything resembling a concrete answer when this question is posed highlights just how impossible the situation is that the doctor is facing.

I’m extremely sympathetic to the reluctance of looking carefully at each cell under a microscope looking for cancer- often looking like the healthy cells nearby. While I can’t defend removing a patient’s entire liver, I also don’t feel comfortable telling them not to when I have absolutely no idea what they should be doing instead.

Can you point to another conflict that was resolved by doing all of these things clearly targeted at civilians? How exactly are the things I mentioned required for fighting a terrorist group? When ISIS was defeated, did the coalition forces come in and just murder literally everyone and flatten occupied villages to the ground, or did they take out leadership? I am not merely talking about civilian casualties when people are near a place targeted by an airstrike- I am talking about specific targeting of civilians.

As for what they should do instead - actually fight Hamas instead of the Palestinians as a whole. By taking actions aimed solely at Palestinian civilians, Israel has lost all claim that this is in any way self defense

There’s a difference between counterinsurgency and just bulldozing entire neighborhoods, shooting children in the head, and preventing anyone from bringing food and medical aid to civilians. Yeah Hamas attacked first but Israel’s response is disproportionate and aimed almost entirely at civilians. Over 54,000 Palestinians have been killed while fewer than 2,000 Israelis have. Estimates vary for the civilian casualties in Gaza, but they’re almost all over 50%. So in the best case, you have Israel killing over 20,000 civilians.

Israel’s plan for taking out Hamas is eliminating the Palestinians. Otherwise, they would be taking even the most basic measures to avoid the mass slaughter of civlians that is going on right now. Before the war and even in the earliest days I leaned a bit more towards Israel because I didn’t realize the level of hatred they have towards the Palestinians and Hamas attacked first, but as the war has gone on it has become impossible to defend their actions. This is a genocide, plain and simple.

The username with this comment is incredible. I just imagine Paul Atreides saying this (Dune Messiah Spoilers)>!with his eyes burned out seeing purely with his spice induced powers!<