The fediverse is just a barnacle on the larger Internet at this point. It has to become more - we need to make our own web

Ok, let’s be real here. A charger can last a decade even if the charging speed slows…a cord will not outlast a phone. If it does, there’s a serious issue

Morality is definitely relative, there’s just some common overlaps

Sometimes the answer is just the same no matter what (coherent) moral framework you examine it through… Sometimes it’s just that simple

I find it’s about size. A small organization can be good or bad, depending on the members. At some point, you reach a size where the orgs focus shifts to perpetuating itself

Damn straight. I don’t fear AI, I fear an even more uneven playing field

When an organization as problematic as the world Bank won’t work with you…

I mean, they kinda don’t. Companies are entities made out of policies guiding how people split up objectives into smaller parts. The more people involved and the more indirect it is, the less coherent it gets

Legal says you need one popup for compliance. Marketing or analytics say you need more users to log in. Elon wants to remind people to call it Twitter.

By the time it filters through managers to the devs, they probably know it’ll be a horrible experience, but what are they going to do? It’s not their job. They’ll get brushed off. There might even be a compelling reason to do it in this way - with this in particular, annoying and intrusive popups are malicious compliance with the EU cookie laws. But everyone seems to be doing it this way - that’s probably what legal is going to recommend rather than interpreting the law themselves

So the problem is the structure. If you want a hierarchy of obedient replaceable cogs, you’ve made sure no one sees the full picture

I’m split, but I lean slightly towards no. On one hand, it could be good for discoverability, and it would help my efforts to make a client-side algorithm

On the other hand, it will make one of Lemmy’s problems worse - engagement. Some people will vote less, and it’s already feeling a little quieter around here as the numbers settled after the Reddit Exodus. I doubt it’ll be a massive change, but a .5% decrease in voting, permanently, could make a difference

Ultimately, you can see it on federated platforms, so shrug

Sodium batteries are a lot cheaper, and the materials are easier to come by

It’s not ironic. This is politics at this point… You can feel however you want about it (I’ve personally lost all faith in humanity), but ultimately this is the current META

You could look at it another way… Britain kept its investments. The colonies all use English common law, they pay their debts, and they stopped dumping tea into the harbor

I think if you call a Nazi a fascist, they’d laugh, but if you call a random MAGA fascist a fascist, they take it as being overly dramatic

Fascism to them is the comically evil natural conclusion that was Nazi Germany - It’s like how they’re not criminals even though they commit crimes, because they’re good people and the criminals are bad (and they’re criminals even if they’ve never broken the law). Fascists are the bad guys, like terrorists - they don’t know or care what it means to be a terrorist

But make no mistake - they understand and believe in the core of fascism. They think everything would be better if “the good people” were in charge, because “the bad people” are the cause of all evil. They want to be the “in group” and either hate or don’t care about “the others”. Which is cruel, but I can understand it - if you could fix the country by getting rid of a few million people, that’s just the price for a better world. Even then, in many of their minds, those people have the option to just shut up and conform and they’ll become a “good person”

That’s what’s so obvious to me now - they think they’ll never be in the out group. Up till now, I’ve been thinking you have to make them understand that fascism must always have an enemy, and when the obvious targets are gone fascism will pick a new enemy to perpetuate itself, forever. One day you’ll end up on the wrong side of that line.

But they don’t want to understand that, and so they never will.

But what would rattle them? What would make them rethink all this? Question their status as one of the “good guys”. They know what they’d let happen, if not join in on. The others aren’t treated as people, and that’s them. Tell them they failed to conform. They didn’t make the cut.

They’re just weird, they’re different and couldn’t even notice because they’re too intrinsically weird. They’re not part of the “in group”, and it’s just a matter of time until someone notices.

There once was a man named Vance, They asked “do you couchfuck, by chance”?

Though rumors abound, There’s no proof to be found, 'Cause the stains are all deep in the loveseat.

She’s got a house she can see Russia from, that’s something

I did that, then started up a new playthrough to check out the updates. That’s a sign of a good game IMO

Makes perfect sense. It’s so simple I can’t believe I didn’t understand until now. How do you scare a fascist? Not by calling them a Nazi piece of shit

Question their status in the “in” group.

That’s true too, it can give you examples to get you started, although it can be pretty hit or miss for that. Most models tend to be very clinical and conservative when it comes to mental health and relationships

I like to use it to actively listen and help me arrange my thoughts, and encourage me to go through with things. Occasionally it surprises me with solid advice, but mostly it’s helpful to put things into words, have them read back to you, and deciding if that sounds true

Psychiatrists don’t generally do therapy, and therapists don’t give diagnoses or medication

Therapy is a bunch of techniques to get people talking, repeating their words back to them, and occasionally offering compensation methods or suggesting possible motivations of others. Telling you what to think or feel is unethical - therapy is about gently leading you to the realizations yourself. They can also provide accountability and advice, but they don’t diagnose or hand you the answer - people circle around their issues and struggle to see it, but they need to make the connections themselves

I don’t give AI too much credit - I give myself credit. I don’t lie to myself, and I don’t have trouble talking about what’s bothering me. I use AI as a tool - these kinds of conversations are a mirror I can use to better understand myself. I’m the one in control, but through an external agent. I guide the AI to guide myself

An AI is not a replacement for a therapist, but it can be an effective tool for self reflection

Talking to a rubber duck or writing to a person who isn’t there is an effective way to process your own thoughts and emotions

Talking to a rubber duck that can rephrase your words and occasionally offer suggestions is basically what therapy is. It absolutely can help me process my emotions and put them into words, or encourage me to put myself out there

That’s the problem with how people look at AI. It’s not a replacement for anything, it’s a tool that can do things that only a human could do before now. It doesn’t need to be right all the time, because it’s not thinking or feeling for me. It’s a tool that improves my ability to think and feel

Idk, I mean I think this is more honest and practical LLM advertising than what we’ve seen before

I like to say AI is good at what I’m bad at. I’m bad at writing emails, putting my emotions out there (unless I’m sleep deprived up to the point I’m past self consciousness), and advocating for my work. LLMs do what takes me hours in a few seconds, even running locally on my modest hardware.

AI will not replace workers without significant qualitative advancements… It can sure as hell smooth the edges in my own life