• 1 Post
  • 35 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 22nd, 2023

help-circle

  • I think of the “bad” dates I would want to be able to warn other women of that didn’t rise to the level of calling the cops. The guy who ordered triple the food and drinks I did and skipped out on the bill. The guy who flat out lied about multiple things and then got irate when I politely excused myself from the date. The MAGA weirdo who went on an unhinged rant about how I needed to submit to him because God said so. I imagine some men have comparable experiences with some anti-social women. The experiences coming to mind were not illegal, but were absolutely things I want to spare my fellow humans from.

    I would prefer the dating apps themselves have some mechanism for disincentivizing anti-social behaviors. It would have to be more than a simple 5-star rating.

    I wonder how it would work IRL to offer the ability to write a few sentences in response to prompts about a date. The written review is not published as-is, but is used in grouping of many reviews to give a summary about a person. Like the summary product reviews on Amazon now. “Bill’s dates found he was prompt and polite. Some dates expressed discomfort at some of his political views” and “Bob’s dates warn he is often late and is quick to use foul language to describe women. Multiple dates report no intention to communicate with Bob further”. “Ben’s dates report he has skipped out on the bill repeatedly, and sends unsolicited dick pics. Multiple dates have blocked him”.

    The group summary gives a buffer so the person reviewed doesn’t know which specific date said what. And ensures the summary doesn’t include negative comments about a person unless multiple dates of theirs independently report similar experiences.

    Of course a bad actor could ditch their dating profile and start fresh any time they build up enough negative reviews to make their summary look bad. And of course the reviews and the summaries would have to be secured tighter than “Tea” is.











  • I have kept half an eye open for updated workarounds since the Feb 25 change and haven’t heard of any.

    In my personal framework, once I’ve bought a copy and supported the artist, it doesn’t weigh on me to acquire a copy elsewhere. YMMV.

    I’m choosing to buy from Not-Amazon going forward. All the major alternatives I’ve looked into similarly lock the content to their readers and apps (based on agreement they have with author), but unlike Amazon, they state it clearly up front and aren’t changing access retroactively.

    Shoutout to bookshop.org for being crystal clear in product descriptions when an ebook is DRM-free.


  • I don’t because I don’t have the necessary depth of skill.

    But I don’t say I “blindly” trust anyone who says they’re FOSS. I read reviews, I do what I can to understand who is behind the project. I try to use software (FOSS or otherwise) in a way that minimizes impact to my system as a whole if something goes south. While I can’t audit code meaningfully, I can setup unique credentials for everything and use good network management practices and other things to create firebreaks.



  • Ah, you want specialized instead of general.

    Well, then is a couple of books enough to train your LLM? How many books are there on wavelengths your first doublet filters for?

    Seems like you might want a forum full of topic specific comments too to feed into the model. A photography textbook with a section on lenses is good, real questions and answers from actual photographers with real scenarios would be better for most people.


  • If copyright were magically not an issue, why does this need to be local/self hosted?

    Like sure, some people will still self host and we need some people to keep information independent of corporations. But for people who just want a summary of a car maintenance task, why would they go to a local repository instead of the largest one they can find?




  • Is environmental impact on the top of anyones list for why they don’t like ChatGPT? It’s not on mine nor on anyones I have talked to.

    The two most common reasons I hear are 1) no trust in the companies hosting the tools to protect consumers and 2) rampant theft of IP to train LLM models.

    The author moves away from strict environmental focus despite claims to the contrary in their intro,

    This post is not about the broader climate impacts of AI beyond chatbots, or about whether AI is bad for other reasons

    […]

    Other Objections, This is all a gimmick anyway. Why not just use Google? ChatGPT doesn’t give better information

    … yet doesn’t address the most common criticisms.

    Worse, the author accuses anyone who pauses to think of the negatives of ChatGPT of being absurdly illogical.

    Being around a lot of adults freaking out over 3 Wh feels like I’m in a dream reality. It has the logic of a bad dream. Everyone is suddenly fixating on this absurd concept or rule that you can’t get a grasp of, and scolding you for not seeing the same thing. Posting long blog posts is my attempt to get out of the weird dream reality this discourse has created.

    IDK what logical fallacy this is but claiming people are “freaking out over 3Wh” is very disingenuous.

    Rating as basic content: 2/10, poor and disingenuous argument

    Rating as example of AI writing: 5/10, I’ve certainly seen worse AI slop