But you don’t understand, in 1992 the Democrats won the Presidency with like 40% of the vote on a message of “Republican but with less bigotry,” which proves that Americans love their basic economic message of “fuck you get your own food, shelter, and medical care!”

this is the video that gave me a useful tool for stopping my intrusive thoughts, in case anyone is looking for relief

https://youtu.be/kvtYjdriSpM

(there are tons so I’m sure there might be better ones or ones that work better for other people…)

now telegram is going to insert random information about South African White genocide to every conversation. or it will be in every recommended reply at least.

I’m not sure I follow.

I’m starting from the assumption that OP genuinely wants to talk to women without being creepy (for lack of a better term), presuming that comes from his intrinsic association between “talking to a woman” and “attempting to establish a romantic relationship with that woman.”

That’s a thought that’s undesirable and presumably persistent. Sort of the definition of “intrusive.”

I’m aware that the pop psych understanding of the phrase is specifically about violent or violence associated thoughts but those are the ones more people have and that probably are more disturbing than annoying.

When your parents say, “did you talk to any of them,” they mean did you strike up a conversation with a woman with no presumption of potential romantic outcome.

When you say it, it seems like you’re assuming there’s a potential for a romantic outcome in every conversation between heterosexual men and women.

Your goal should be to strike up a conversation with a woman about random topics of interest, including very shallow ones, with no expectation that you’re evaluating her as a potential mate, and she’s not evaluating you.

Yes, we’re all subject to intrusive thoughts so from time to time, you’ll fail at this goal and start thinking about a romantic path. That’s fine. Just acknowledge it to yourself and endeavor to do better.

It will probably take time and practice. Give yourself grace to try and fail and learn. You’ll know you’re succeeding when you realize you had a conversation with a woman without her gender being a consequential thought in your mind.

right but if I’m thinking correctly (maybe not) then if it “merely” wasn’t harmful, wouldn’t there be room for variation within the species of toxicity?

I feel like if evolution is correct (I’m confident it is) then it must be evolutionarily advantageous to have the capacity to kill a herd of elephants with one’s toxin, assuming all animals in the group have that capacity.

We can go lower!!!

lots of rights get modified, curtailed, or eliminated by the larger society based on misuse or misbehavior or other transgressions.

(or positions of power, etc…)

Don’t think of it as a race, think of it as an opportunity to find kindred spirits

with “hire more” you do run up against the “9 women can have a baby in 1 month” limit, but in this case it’s likely to help.

if this is machine learning and neural networks, I can believe it’s a good thing, maybe even meaningful for the potential of so called artificial intelligence.

if this is an LLM that’s alleged to have popped this “virus tail” theory out of… what exactly…? I’m not buying it.

https://www.ncja.org/crimeandjusticenews/ice-to-review-social-media-users-for-negative-activity-threats

This has a version of the article without the “non paywall” landing page/wall.

I find that I see memes here about a week before my wife shows them to me (presumably from reddit)

https://wikitok.vercel.app/

WikiTok

Not sure if there’s an app yet, I found one on the Android store by Arakassia…

for clarity he built Facebook to rate how hot women at his college were…

social media

first, you’re talking about software “engineers” which means you aren’t talking about engineers in general.

and there’s a good chance none of them have ever had an engineering course in their life. they’re hackers who are good at making code.

the reason they probably seem reluctant to share is that what they’ve cobbled together with bubble gum and bailing wire is difficult to explain quickly and thoroughly AND they’d be taking time away from their assigned tasks to do so without having any change to their deadlines.

stop blaming them and start blaming their management for not giving them the time and permission they need to help you. go to the management and say you need so-and-so to be assigned 40 or 80 hours specifically to help you understand these widgets.

and in the future you need to push for clean up, documentation, lessons learned, and training to be part of every project estimate.

Well back when computers were being developed/ improved there was a pretty strong commitment throughout the Western nations to advancing and expanding education for everyone.

In that paradigm, people would become more educated and better at critical thinking at a steady pace, probably on par with the rate at which computer programs advanced in their capacity to mimic human behavior.

So, “can it fool more people into believing it’s a human” would’ve been a great test of whether the program was super advanced.

Instead we’ve had 50 years of attacks on public education by Republicans that has been tolerated - or at least not fought hard enough - by Democrats. So not particularly advanced programs can fool a great many people. That does make the Turing Test moot, I think.

stuff like this I actually don’t mind.

Someone had to look at these research papers - assuredly more than one - about (in this case) the effects of steroid abuse in teens. They had to understand the gist of that research. Then they had to create a pithy one liner that conveys that gist, albeit arguably dishonestly.

That’s way better than “windmills cause cancer” or “migrants are eating pets.”

I’m all for the trend of badly summarizing important clinical research, because we can correct that. At least we have a better chance of correcting that than pure lies.