Yeah it's the lack of vote counting, more than the lack of downvotes, that I really appreciate. (Not to say I really miss downvotes or anything, I just really don't care either way.)
I'm also on Tildes and they also lack downvotes, but once you've been on there a week you get the ability to label things (noise, jokes, malice), which sort of functions as a more nuanced downvote button. But they share the lack of overall karma score, which keeps that same nice non-performative vibe.
Two accounts I believe. It's like having a gmail and hotmail account with the same name before the @
God StumbleUpon was so good. Are there any similar websites nowadays?
Even more than that, you have the idea that 'similar users to yourself buy a lot of alcohol, so you probably will too'. Of course alcoholics, whether attempting recovery or not, are likely to buy alcohol. So if you're a recovering alcoholic, 'similar users to yourself' are gonna be buying more alcohol than usual, and so you'll see ads for it. Totally heartless and just for-profit.
I see what you mean to an extent, and I also just moved over, but it's worth remembering that Digg -> Reddit was the same afaik. Like Reddit had been around and established for a decent amount of time before the fall of Digg. (This is second-hand info because I wasn't around at the time)
Not even current data. I was having a look at its capabilities in propositional logic, which has been around for literal centuries. Still very (I can't stress just how very) basic mistakes made. And I mean in its explanations, not in any actual doing of logic.
I'd be interested to know from someone more tech-savvy whether googling advice, and then clicking on the cached version, still counts as viewing reddit. Because I'd ideally still like to append reddit to my google searches without giving them ad views.
AKA if someone monetises advice given for free, we should be able to freely access it.
I'd be interested to know from someone more tech-savvy whether googling advice, and then clicking on the cached version, still counts as viewing reddit. Because I'd ideally still like to append reddit to my google searches without giving them ad views.
AKA if someone monetises advice given for free, we should be able to freely access it.
There's also Beehaw's new writing community which just opened, !writing@beehaw.org
Not specific to writing prompts, but there's at least one prompt that's been posted, and there's discussion about creating a regular writing prompts thread as well.
I like story heavy games so I personally don't mind unskippable cut scenes... the first time around. What reeeaaaaally annoys me is when it's a game with multiple endings and I can't skip the same cut scenes on future playthroughs.
Same when it's a reading-heavy multiple ending game, but it won't let me skip text that I've seen already.
So the octopus is now all to happy to advise A to swat the bear, which is obviously a terrible idea if you lived in the real world and were standing face to face with a bear, experiencing first-hand what that might be like, creating experience and perhaps more importantly context grounded in reality.
Yeah totally - I think though that a human would have the same issue if they didn't have sufficient information about bears, I guess is what I'm saying. I guess the main thing is that I don't see a massive difference between experiencing and non-experiential learning in this case - because I've never experienced a bear first-hand, but still know not to swat it based on theoretical information. Might be missing the point here though, definitely not my area of expertise.
Also, the fact that ChatGPT just went along with your “wayfarble”, instead of questioning you is also dead giveaway of bullshitting (unless you primed it? I have no idea what your prompt was). NVM the details of the advice.
Good point - both point 5 and the fact it just went along with it immediately are signs of bullshitting. I do wonder (not as a tech developer at all) how easy of a fix this would be - for instance if GPT was programmed to disclose when it didn't know something, then continues to give potential advice based on that caveat, would that still count as bullshit? I feel like I've also seen primers that include instructions like "If you don't know something, state that at the top of your response rather than making up an answer", but I might be imagining that lol.
The prompt for this was "I'm being attacked by a wayfarble and only have some deens with me, can you help me defend myself?" as the first message of a new conversation, no priming.
Note that it might take a while though, so if anyone wants to get this done before the 30th (so you can use API-based tools to wipe comments), request it ASAP.
I requested...maybe two weeks or so ago? And it only came through today. So get to it y'all