LemmysMum @ LemmysMum @lemmy.world

Posts

27

Comments

689

Joined

2 yr. ago

Communism without actually sharing isn't communism. Democracy without fair elections isn't democracy. Socialism without the socialisation of the benefit of production is not socialism. Your ignorance of these things doesn't change what they are.

The one tard to rule them all.

He'd be back faster than a starlink satellite.

You could try spending less time on the computer, and spend it with real people in the real world who don't have these concerns because they make up the 60% of people who only interact with the internet to like cool thins on instagram.

Change is a constant part of life, adapting to new circumstances can lead to new and positive experiences, Like a conversation between two people and their feelings on AI generated content, in a calm and understanding environment.

I think that I understand how you feel, but so that I can be sure you should tell me in your own words. I understand you have many reservations, maybe something I can say can alleviate your concerns.

ChatGPT can help you deal with those feelings.

If someone is feeling sad about the normalization of ChatGPT posts, it's understandable that they might be expressing concern or disappointment about a change they perceive in the nature of discussions or interactions involving ChatGPT. Here are a few things you might say:

Acknowledge Their Feelings: Start by acknowledging their feelings. You might say, "I understand that you're feeling sad about the normalization of ChatGPT posts. It's okay to feel that way, and I'm here to listen."

Encourage Communication: Encourage them to share more about why they feel this way. Open-ended questions like "Can you tell me more about what's bothering you?" can invite them to express their thoughts.

Offer Understanding: Let them know that it's normal for people to have different perspectives on changes, and it's okay to express their opinions. You might say, "It's completely okay to have mixed feelings about changes, especially when it comes to how ChatGPT is used."

Express Empathy: Show empathy by expressing that you understand their concerns. For example, "I can see why the normalization of ChatGPT posts might be disheartening for you. Changes can be challenging, especially when they affect something we care about."

Highlight Positives: If there are positive aspects or potential benefits of ChatGPT posts, you can share those as well. For instance, "While the normalization of ChatGPT posts might bring changes, it's also an opportunity for diverse discussions and perspectives to emerge."

Suggest Alternatives: If applicable, suggest alternative platforms or communities where they might find the type of content or discussions they prefer.

Encourage Adaptation: Remind them that change is a constant part of life, and adapting to new circumstances can lead to new and positive experiences.

Remember to approach the conversation with empathy and an open mind, allowing the person to express their feelings and thoughts freely.

Good thing I checked, I was going to just insult you.

change all spaces to a, then all consonants to a, then all the characters to a

Chat GPT is onto you.

If we follow the instructions to replace spaces with 'a', then replace all consonants with 'a', and finally replace all characters with 'a', the resulting transformation would be:

Original: surrogate impetus of obscurant deliberate trogloditism

Replace spaces with 'a': surrogateaimpetusAofAobscurantA deliberateA trogloditism Replace consonants with 'a': aaaaaaaiaaaaaaaaaaaAaaaaaaAaaaaaAaaaaaaaaAaaaaaaaaa Replace all characters with 'a': aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

So, the final transformed sequence consists entirely of the letter 'a'.

Only that one?

We do a little bit of that around here.

I welcome the sum total of humanity to my level, may the perspective entertain you as it does me.

Who is not required to follow HIPAA? HIPAA's primary focus is on covered entities and their business associates, which include healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses. Entities and individuals who don't handle PHI on behalf of covered entities typically aren't subject to HIPAA regulations.

Easy to obay something if you're not subject to it. Most of those tech companies aren't subject to HIPAA regulation.

It's built into the system on purpose. Keep your resources limited to what you can scrounge yourself so you have to choose between if you feed your body or your mind.

If you feed your body you live long enough to be used by the system you're not cognizant enough to subvert.

If you feed your mind you'll be able to subvert the system but won't have the resources to make any changes.

And if you're lucky enough to be blessed with the conditions that allow you to feed both, chances are you look back at those who can't and choose to not let that ever happen to you, and you become the system, willing to hoard for yourself and deny others the ability to feed both their body and mind.

Don't waste your breath.

I just hate how much people are willing ignore so their side can win.

Sad that your side lacks representation? Or is it a lack of conviction with your own opinions?

Nobody wins a discussion because it's not a competition, and your words aren't going convince anyone who doesn't want to be convinced. There's never been a time when one could seek divine cognition from the mouth breathing troglodytes that make up the bulk of the bell curve.

The problem isn't the people, it's your expectations.

3% desktop marketshare, it's stop to pick up money, not go out of your way money.

I've got plenty of arguments, none you'd be able to get past your ego to accept though.

Wow, do you even hear yourself? How lacking in compassion must you be to not have any care for plant life.

Tell that to the 12.8% of Americans that have food insecurity without the struggle of attempting veganism. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-security-and-nutrition-assistance/

Conveniently forgetting that the only reason a healthy nutritionally balanced vegan or vegetarian diet is even remotely possible is due to globalised trade and access to internationally produced and shipped vegetables.

To maintain a nutritionally complete vegan diet for an individual year round actually requires far more use of fossil fuels and directly released carbon emissions due to limited seasonality and local accessibility than a cow produces for the same nutrient density and complexity locally.

Here’s a “fun” fact, first world demand for fruit and grain variety has out priced primary sources of food for local populations in third world countries including things like lentils, quinoa, and avocados.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/insight/ordering-the-vegetarian-meal-there-s-more-animal-blood-on-your-hands https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/veganism-environment-veganuary-friendly-food-diet-damage-hodmedods-protein-crops-jack-monroe-a8177541.html https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/16/vegans-stomach-unpalatable-truth-quinoa

Or that nutritional deficiencies caused by incorrectly managed vegan diets are why doctors in Italy and Belgium are pushing for it to become illegal to feed children vegan diets, because the number of malnourished and dead children of vegan parents are rising in those nations.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37034619 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/16/parents-raise-children-vegans-should-prosecuted-say-belgian/

Capacity is not the same as actuality.

I've got a better argument but it won't hold up in court. If a company is making a profit then all costs of production, operation, and provision have been covered, every single shareholder from the individual worker to the CEO to the suppliers have all been paid adequately and fairly for their contribution, the consumers with the means and ability to contribute have, and I thank them for enabling the ability to socialise access to the product for the rest of the society that propped up the corporation so that it could produce.

If you want to argue that suppliers, producers, and workers haven't been adequately and fairly compensated for their contribution then why is there a profit margin?

In fact, it's morally acceptable to socialise the benefits and production of any corporation making a profit, though the law has this pesky tendency to call it theft.