Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this. Also, happy April Fool’s in advance.)
tip from a discord:
I’ve been doing some micro tasking to train LLM’s the last few months to earn some extra cash, the last month it’s all dried up, no tasks available. I can’t help thinking that is a sign of a bubble deflating.
I knew the HN reaction to Marine Le Pen being banned from being elected to public office would be unhinged, but weirdly I did not have “good, she’s a woman and weak so now a strong man can lead RN to glorious victory” on my bingo card. More fool me, misogyny is always on the card.
There’s a comment in there about how well it reflects on the British system that Bobby Sands was allowed to stand as an MP for Sinn Féin despite being an IRA member and a prisoner. This ignores that a) Sinn Féin policy was and is not to take seats in the British parliament, so he wouldn’t have been voting or sitting on any committees, and b) Bobby Sands died in prison on hunger strike.
Anyone who uses gen AI is my opp, status report:
- so far every restaurant that I’ve been to where I noticed AI slop as part of the decor has sucked. One of the ones local to me closed, hooray!
- IDF: haha look we are Ghibli please send us more machine guns
- a third thing
jesus fucking christ I think that IDF tweet is the worst thing that has ever existed
I’ve been browsing bluesky a fair amount recently and it’s chock full of artists making non-AI Ghibli inspired art in response to the AI trend. Which is neat.
My University Keeps Sending Me Stupid Emails About AI, a continuing series:
From the email:
The debate will be chaired by Michael Pike. Speaking for the motion are Prof. Gregory O’Hare (TCD), Maeve Hynes, Prof. Gary Boyd and Chatgpt assisted by Student Curator Ruan McCabe, all UCD. Speaking against the motion are David Capener (UU), Lucy O’Connell, Peter Cody and Meabh O’Leary, all UCD.
Notwithstanding the subject matter, I feel like I’ve always gotten limited value from these Oxford-style university debates. KQED used to run a series called Intelligence Squared US that crammed it into an hour, and I shudder to think what that’s become in the era of Trump and AI. It seems like a format that was developed to be the intellectual equivalent of intramural sports, complete with a form of scoring. But that contrivance renders it devoid of nuance, and also means it can be used to platform and launder ugly bullshit, since each side has to be strictly pro- or anti-whatever.
Really, it strikes me as a forerunner of the false certainty and point-scoring inherent in Twitter-style short-form discourse. In some ways, the format was unconsciously pared down and plopped online, without any sort of inquiry into its weaknesses. I’d be interested to know if anyone feels any different.
I have no knowledge or insight on the topic, but I used to get recommendations for “intelligence squared” videos on YouTube and I always thought it was a terrible, self-aggrandizing title for a series or event. Smart People Taking About Smart Things.
Competitive forensics is an intellectual exercise, not a way of addressing or solving social problems. It’s like translating Cæsar’s Commentaries — you’re not likely or expected to have any new and valuable insights that previous translators missed, but it builds and demonstrates certain kinds of abilities and readiness.
Seeing it any other way, using it any other way, is a conceptual error with the usual outcomes.
OpenNutrition – a dataset an LLM that allows you to play “vibe nutritionist”
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43569190
First response is good quality:
This is not a dataset. This is an insult to the very idea of data. This is the most anti-scientific post I have ever seen voted to the top of HN. Truth about the world is not derived from three LLMs stacked on top of each other in a trenchcoat.