Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)FR
Posts
1
Comments
134
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • No, I believe we are just pieces of meat with enough nureons to be capable of abstract concepts. However currently the existence of a soil is unfalsifiable, so I wouldn't be able to prove or disprove my clain.

  • idk I feel its pretty useful in finding others like you?

    True but to me my gender is really not a factor in who I am, and while it might be a useful huistic for finding those who are similar to me, I can think of far better ones then that (e.g. hobbies, position on the asexuality spectrum)

    Your statement about politicians is something I agree with, I'm more thinking about how identifying as an outlier is less useful then identifying as your birth gender when doing statistical analysis for polls with low sample size which I often participate in, especially when it makes no difference to me.

    by being publicly open about it, you help others feel confident ...

    That's a good point that I'll think on

    but again, you do you boo and I'm gonna keep being me by confusing all the guys in the gym lockers 🤪

    You too, I wish you luck with that.

  • Personally I don't engage with gender. Gender is only useful in changing peoples perceptions of yourself and I don't find people "lying" about my identity to my face to be an issue. I would identify as non binary or agender, but to do that would induce cognitive burden on others and make survay data more difficult, so I just don't. Life is too short to bother educating people you meet about how you understand your own gender.

    Who am I, I'm fractal and my pronouns are whatever you are willing to calling me in this moment.

  • Probably listen to there speeches and surmons that are posted online then figure it out. Another theory is it could be a highly selective interpretation of the Jewish old testiment law to provide "evidence" that Satan and his servants walk along them and are a threat to everything they stand for

  • The tech is great at pretending to be human. It is simply a next "word" (or phrase) predictor. It is not good at answering obscure questions, writing code or making a logical argument. It is good at simulating someone.

    It is my experience that it approximates a human well, but it doesn't get the details right (like truthness or reflecting objective reality), making it useless for essay writing, but great for stuff like character AI and other human simulations.

    If you are right, give an actual Iogical response only capable by a human, as opposed to a generic ad hominem. I repeat my question, Have you actually used any of the GPT3 era models?

  • ... Don't pull a strawman, all I said is that the AI's designed to approximate human written text, do a good job at approximating human text.

    This means you can use them to simulate a reddit thread or make a fake wikipedia page, or construct a set of responses to someone who wants comfort.

    Next time, read what someone actually says, and respond to that.

  • ... Have you tried any of the recent ones? As it stands chatGPT and Gemini are both built with guardrails strong enough to require custom inputs to jailbreak, with techniques such as Reinforcement learning from Human Feedback uses to lobotomize misconduct out of the AI's.

  • If all you need is a one sided conversation designed to make you feel better, LLM's are great at concocting such "pep talks". For some, that just might be enough to male it believable. The Turing test was cracked years ago, only now do we have access to things that can do that for free*.