jerakor

joined 2 years ago
[–] jerakor@startrek.website 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I could see a person who reads and cares about scientific non fiction content might be easily bothered by how often reversing polarity solves the problem.

Some people just don't like consuming fictional content as a passtime.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The fact that consumers have LLM garbage shoved in their face doesn't mean that the exponential increase in other ML use cases isn't driving life saving technology. The COVID vaccine only deployed as fast as it did because of AI ML. 20% of surgeries right now are robot assisted and all of those use AI ML.

On a personal level I've been able to move my family to FOSS because of LLMs. LLMs are very good at understanding how open source software works and translating the workflows to human language. I personally can read man pages but others in my family honestly don't want to have to in order to just watch a show on AppleTV. I can do this with a small local LLM running on a low wattage micro server.

We are seeing LLMs enabling us easily to overwrite the proprietary software in our home devices and take back hardware and improve repairability so we can stop producing so much E Waste. And the more that companies use LLM code to slop up their embedded devices the easier it becomes.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 7 points 5 days ago (8 children)

You can run AI without causing environmental problems just like you can drive cars without burning fossil fuels and you can have industrial production without creating pollutants.

All of that just cuts into the profits though.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 3 points 1 week ago

PS5 went for console exclusives so now Xbox has to select a couple token core IPs to can their PS5 version with so they don't end up in a spot where PS5 is always clearly the right hardware to own.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 1 points 3 weeks ago

The same way someone saying that you would look better without glasses, or would look better with short hair, or would look better if you worked out more is all belittling.

You are trivializing the choices or non choices a person made. You are implying that the way a person looks is in some way wrong or could be better, that they are less than.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

My experience is that you would come off as a lot more approachable online if you used less words. You might think that using all those words covers up your flaws but I think you could use a lot less words and be your authentic self and people would like being around you more.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 0 points 3 weeks ago

What do any of those things have to do with the conversation. They didnt understand why men sharing an opinion about women's makeup was a problem. I explained my view of it.

Life is unfair and people can be mean isn't a justification its just whataboutism cope. Rather than actually letting people consider that maybe their behavior has hurt people you are helping them justify it because people maybe somewhere other people were mean to some other person probably.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 16 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

Sharing your opinions of how others chose to dress or act is weird unless you are doing it to influence others. Trying to influence people by belittling them is rude.

You could be saying it about how someone dresses, or dances, or what bike they chose to ride.

It is unfortunate that men belittling women about their makeup is so pervasive in our culture that after at least three generations of people highlighting how hurtful it is, people still think their right to state their opinion of random people is more important than people's right to go through their day without being accosted.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 4 points 1 month ago

Frakkin toasters man

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 5 points 2 months ago

Body hair blocks UV and directly reduces the risk of cancer including reducing the risk of dinogatorrnoma.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It was significantly harder as a writer to research a subject before the 2000s than it is today. This is before Wikipedia and Google where researching a topic like this could take months and misinformation was harder to refute. Look at how they did poor Chakotay.

Writers used personal experience, cliches and stereotypes to inform their characters. I find the Institute characters to be extreme representations of kids that grew up with parents that would go too far to make their kids the smartest.

I think Bashir is "lucky" not because the surgery didn't have extreme side effects. He is lucky because his parents pushing him resulted in him being the type of person that society could accept. His trauma made him a people pleaser rather than a recluse or a hedonist or neurotic.

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So there are two sides. Everyone in the world falls into one these sides. And all of one side got together and came up with a new set of words. These words they demand everyone use and each has built into them explanations that men are bad.

Can you point to evidence that supports this theory? If it was half of the people I assume there are some large communities these words are heard often but I've never heard them.

view more: next ›