MAKE PRODUCT AT LOSS

GET CAPITOL TO MAKE PRODUCT LOOK BIGGER

SELL PRODUCT FOR MORE THAN SPENT

FIRE EVERYONE TO “MAKE SUSTAINABLE” (LIE)

LEAVE WITH GOLDEN PARACHUTE

REPEAT TILL YOU CAN BUY ENOUGH PROPERTIES TO RAISE SHITHEAD KID WHO WILL RUIN YOUR FORTUNE

Don’t even need to make it about code. I once asked what a term meant in a page full of a certain well known FOSS application’s benchmarks page. It gave me a lot of garbage that was unrelated because it made an assumption about the term, exactly the assumption I was trying to avoid. I try to deviate it away from that, and it fails to say anything coherent and then loops back and gives that initial attempt as the answer again. I was stuck unable from stopping it from hallucinating.

How? Why?

Basically, it was information you could only find by looking at the github code, and it was pretty straightforward - but the LLM sees “benchmark” and it must therefore make a bajillion assumptions.

Even if asked not to.

I have a conclusion to make. It does do the code thing too, and it is directly related. Once asked about a library, and it found a post where someone was ASKING if XYZ was what a piece of code was for - and it gave it out as if it was the answer. It wasn’t. And this is the root of the problem:

AI’s never say “I don’t know”.

It must ALWAYS know. It must ALWAYS assume something, anything, because not knowing is a crime and it won’t commit it.

And that makes them shit.

This is why I expect the video side of things to be more on the level of stream channels that self-host content with subscriptions for access to VoDs, rather than singular big platforms. Streaming in of itself is a lot of traffic too, but you have much bigger RoI per bandwidth spent with live viewers, and you cut down the storage requirements with limited VoD access too.

The only problem then becomes discovering these channels from the rest of the federated space, but honestly, either that will be a problem that will be solved by the space in a more general manner (oooh, imagine the return of web rings! Lol) or… It will end up being an issue that doesn’t matter. Like right now, still coming from video games, MinnMax and Second Wind are two creator-owned platforms that appear to be relatively unpopular, with short amount of thousands of views, except they run off of donations on Patreons and the viewers they do have keep them afloat with a good decent margin.

One of the things most people I know like about Azula is that the show ended with her still being evil. They wrote her to be genuine with herself, and that meant no redemption.

I’m only on my very first year of DevOps, and already I have five years worth of AI giving me hilarious, sad and ruinous answers regarding the field.

I needed proper knowledge of Ansible ONCE so far, and it managed to lie about Ansible to me TWICE. AI is many things, but an expert system it is not.

They’re not market researching the gameplay. They’re market researching the visual elements, the animations, the artstyle, the sounds, the indicators…

🌍👨‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

Always has been

I really dislike the foldables that open to tablet mode. And I love foldables that become a square because they have none of the drawbacks while looking cool as shit when un/pocketing.

When I see someone parked awfully, I do give them the benefit of the doubt that they might have parked where there was room, and someone else before them parked even more absurdly bad.

But I wouldn’t if they show up making that kind of a scene.

We just need to respond with “objectively wrong: <link to some data>” and copy paste it again if the same person replies.

Oh, shit, look. My favorite emulation station and second favorite console.

I HAVE seen people turn around discussions when they have evidence of being more in the know than the established flow of Karma. Hell, I’ve seen it happen with people who only managed to produce complex evidence hours in and that I myself had commented in disbelief they could be right.

But it’s a rare occurrence even among discussions that do have a person who’s such. Often, post scores pre-dispose the new people coming in into choosing who to agree and disagree on, and even the actual expert who objectively “wins the fight” will continue to get downvotes just because the other downvotes were there. This often leads to the whole “Highschool America is asleep, it’s okay to post X” mentality you’d see in some communities.

Personally, I think that scoring systems have a useful place. Even downvotes. Sorting things is useful. But I see no reason to actually show the numbers. If scores were hidden, we’d have no more and no less benefits. But that stuff is instance-admin policy and I don’t really feel like fighting for it. Right now, Lemmy isn’t having enough issues like that that I’m bothered, and I don’t know if it’ll ever grow to the point it will.

Robots.

I don’t think humans have the capacity for utopia. We can cooperate, but even if we achieve a near-optimal performant system of any kind, we never achieve stasis. We have before changed things for what can only be collectively said to be for the hell of it (when in reality it was because someone individually benefitted) and any utopia we’d achieve wouldn’t last long and then we would erroneously attribute mistake of that Utopia’s fall to its general feasibility. Plus I fail to consider a society that can’t last as one that is utopic.

So… We won’t.

But robots will. Once we’re gone and they’re still around.

And I don’t think that is a good thing for the robots either.

I wonder what’s the largest that defederates with the most.

I also wonder what’s the largest that gets defederated the most.

I know both have very subjective ways to measure the metrics, but still, there must be some sort of answer.

Well, on reddit, I was only ever banned from one community, that being /r/worldnews.

And I got banned because there were hours old comments by users there basically stating it was a good thing that old people were dying from covid. They were downvoted, but still, not enough, and no one had the guts to say it so I did: I told them that they were plaguespreaders and a blight on humanity, and should improve it by killing themselves, and the fact they weren’t already banned was a gigantic shame for the website.

Which I stand by.

The mods then banned me (after I got like 50 upvotes in a couple minutes proving people paid attention to the comments but didn’t realize how nefarious they were) but… didn’t ban the other users. That is until I complained about it elsewhere and basically highlighted how terrible the mods of that subreddit are. THEN they got banned.

They still didn’t unban me and I wear that ban with pride. I am 100% aware that I triggered an automated ban on myself. Which is, actually, the de facto bad experience I bring to the table: One of the largest subreddits, filled with nothing but “”“powermods”“”, is being left completely unmoderated and easily free to be astroturfed by coordinated bad actors. This is effectively the same as being tolerant of them

My one political stance on social media is no one should ever be allowed to moderate more than 3 communities.

I do think Lemmy instances should have a publicly-visible setting for essentially stating how many communities someone can moderate maximum.

But I doubt it’ll be a problem for a while.

It’s interesting how Lemmy shows active users before subscribing. Even reddit shows “readers” (people currently online), but people hyperfocus on subscribers (which can be dead accounts).

deleted by creator

Butting in again to complain that most apps STILL auto-load images in comments with no way to disable it.

A travesty.

I want to move away from voyager, I really do. But I can’t as long because I just know someone will post that 720x38900px tall zelda fanart and ruin a whole thread. Or goatse.

I think this is very close to the most solid answer possible. Like

This is Bad content

I agree completely with this bit. Downvotes are inherently subjective, as is the concept of Bad content. But to make a choice of what to downvote, someone has to identify something worth deeming downvotable, and screw it, that’s a good way to deacribe what the majority of what falls under that umbrella.

The next bit is where I’d make a correction.

which I want others to see less of

You can’t unsee that bad content, it’s too late. And you can’t guarantee that downvoting will dissuade its continued presence. The only correlation between the two involves an expected emotional attachment between the posters of the bad content and their scoring outcome, and that’s not always here nor there. Bad content posters can be persistent.

But downvoting it has an immediate effect on the visibility of the Bad content for other people. It also labels that content. Doing so, puts it away from other people’s eyes, and tells others that someone thinks it should be put away. Maybe they’ll come to agree or disagree with that downvote, maybe it’ll lead to you seeing less content. Also no guarantee. But that immediate effect, the visibility and the score, can not be taken away.

In either scenario, it’s a communication tool. It may relate to your wishes for content, but mechanically, its impact is felt by a third party.