Sasha [They/Them]

A favourite phrase of mine that comes up in so many different areas of life is: “soft on people, hard on structures.” Individuals tend to be pretty good, genuine and caring people.

It’s much like how an atheist might be a great person, but the new atheist movement became a festering cesspool of anti-feminist right wing bigotry. Having a religion doesn’t change much really, shit people are universal.

It’s my HRT birthday today, two years now and it’s really sunny and warm. It’s a nice day :3

There’s also a considerable portion of the world who hates Greta and is probably cheering them on. The first news story I saw pop up about Greta being kidnapped said Israel was doing the world a favour…

I’m getting replies in my inbox but I can’t view post comments lol, thankyou!

I’m not poor but most of my fun stuff is free, hanging out at parks (picnics with friends or just relaxing with a book or something), walking/cycling trails, free or pay as you feel shows and weekly food not bombs community dinners.

Nothing wrong with a 1 bedroom apartment tbh, and I don’t understand why not living in a house means you can’t buy and own things lol. I’ve got loads of stuff I can do here if I don’t want to go out, I’ve even got plenty of private outdoor space. If I didn’t have so much stuff keeping me busy I could very easily stay in my apartment for weeks at a time, only really leaving to get groceries, I’ve never gone mad from it.

Tbh I find this life is significantly cheaper given I don’t have as much maintenance as a house, and I don’t need to pay the absurdly high costs associated with a car.

Edit: looks like jerboa broke for me so I’ve got no clue if this posted or what anyone else is saying lol

I meant they’re specifically not going for that though. The experiment isn’t about improving the environment itself, it’s about improving the LLM. Otherwise they’d have spent the paper evaluating the effects of different environments and not different LLMs.

I’m pretty sure they touch on those points in the paper, they knew they were overloading it and were looking at how it handled that in particular. My understanding is that they’re testing failure modes to try and probe the inner workings to some degree; they discuss the impact of filling up the context in the abstract, mention it’s designed to stress test and are particularly interested in memory limits, so I’m pretty sure they’ve deliberately chosen to not cater to an LLMs ideal conditions. It’s not really a real world use case of LLMs running a business (even if that’s the framing given initially), it’s not just a test to demonstrate capabilities, it’s an experiment meant to break them in a simulated environment. The last line of the abstract kind highlights this, they’re hoping to find flaws to improve the models generally.

Either way, I just meant to point out that they can absolutely just output junk as a failure mode.

LLMs can degrade by giving “wrong” answers, but not because of network congestion ofc.

That paper is fucking hilarious, but the tl;dr is that when asked to manage a vending machine business for an extended period of time, they eventually go completely insane. Some have an existential crisis, some call the whole thing a conspiracy and call the FBI, etc. it’s amazing how trash they are.

Ahaha, that’s very true Scandinavia is a mysterious place.

Yeah the comment on Cleopatra is just laughable on the face of it haha, I didn’t even think it was worth addressing.

Glad you’re stepping away there’s no point getting worked up on this. I normally wouldn’t have engaged to this degree myself, but I found that particular rebuttal to Tacitus to be so damn funny that I couldn’t not.

I suspect they’re genuine, I feel I’ve been this person in the past. Sometimes it’s hard to learn to reevaluate and be wrong about things, and religion is a pretty stigmatising issue that can leave you with a lot of unresolved and misguided anger. It’s unfortunate, but human.

The claim about Tacitus not writing on Jesus comes from one “source” in the pop culture section. That source is a fictional character in a novel (one who’s obviously portrayed as highly biased on this issue, ironically…) it gets even more embarassing when you look up what that novel is about…

There’s also this which mentions that his writings on Jesus are pretty much agreed to be authentic. The Roman empire was indeed very good at keeping records, that’s why Tacitus is considered such a reliable source…

You’re making a lot of claims about the motivations of people, with no actual evidence to show for it, and using that to dismiss them as sources. This is painfully ironic. Not everything is a Catholic conspiracy, it’s okay for the world to be nuanced.

There are non-biblical sources

No there aren’t, you just believe the bible

???

Either way, I appreciate you providing those, it’s a fascinating topic. Frankly even if Jesus was just some guy running around deceiving people into thinking he was the Messiah, he had some good lessons and that’s gotta count for something.

This is something widely accepted by secular historians, it’s widely accepted by atheists too.

Occam’s razor does not work like that. It would actually suggest that Jesus did exist, given that it requires a single person to have existed instead of requiring a mountain of very valid evidence to be a conspiracy while a whole group people, who’s entire profession revolves around determining the trustworthiness of such evidence, to suddenly all be very bad at their job on this one specific issue etc.

Well again, it doesn’t actually matter to me. I’m not trying to have a debate, I’m just saying that’s what I’ve heard and I tend to trust experts on their own fields. You can make up your own mind about what you believe, makes no difference to me.

I don’t think it’s really that big of a deal if he was a real person or not, it doesn’t say anything about the validity of religion one way or the other. Plus I don’t think it’s really that far fetched that someone could have amassed a bunch of followers and birthed a new religion. It still happens in the modern world.

Edit: I read how you’ve responded to everyone else. Take a break friend, people are just having a discussion with you, disagreing isn’t an attack.

It’s fine if you personally think the evidence isn’t reliable, but calling everyone delusional and shouting down frankly well supported arguments as fake with no way to back it up all while refusing to read and engage with them isn’t a good look. If you can legitimately explain why people are wrong, I’m sure they would appreciate the discussion and potentially learning something.

If you can’t, then I’d suggest reflecting on why this is so upsetting to you. Believe me I absolutely understand what it’s like to hate religion and to be filled with an intense desire to want it to all be wrong and evil, but that shouldn’t affect how you treat people.

I’m no expert whatsoever, because frankly it makes no difference to me, but last I heard it was accepted that Jesus the person existed.

It’s hard to find trustworthy sources when I’m being lazy and so many people are trying push very biased views, but this is something, I guess. There’s also a Wikipedia article about it, but I’m tired and it’s dry.

I deleted one once because I complained about someone by name, hoping someone else would have experience with them and could offer better advice.

I think it would have been relatively easy for them to find that post, which I didn’t want to risk given that they could cause me harm by denying their services. It wouldn’t have been hard to work out who I was given the context I provided.

The possums even more so I’d say, especially in the cities.

I’m actually not sure I’ve ever seen a wild platypus, and I haven’t seen a wombat since I was very young, but I don’t think I’ve ever lived in an area with them. Kangaroos were everywhere growing up in the bush though, in the backyard, school car park, sharp bend around a dark corner…

Snakes on a plane, you take a drink every time there’s a snake on a plane. (I can’t remember where I’m stealing this from)

Yup, getting skills is just worthwhile pain. It’s been hard trying to convince some of the younger tech interested people I know to put in the effort instead of going down the AI route, but I know exactly where that’ll lead them. You don’t get good at this stuff by succeeding, it’s the endless failure.

When I say the basics, I mean understanding logic and reasoning and what constitutes scientific evidence. Much of it is word association at best, the example that comes to mind is the claim that the pillars of creation prove that creationism is true.

In one example in my copy of the Qur’an, they point to a journalist using the word smoke to discuss the state of the early universe as proof that the Qur’an predicted modern cosmology because heaven was smoke before Allah commanded it to exist. It’s an unproven claim, they’ve just drawn a vague connection and decided that counts as evidence.

Trans nonby software dev who dated a furry artist, my disdain for AI knows no limits.

I use Nobara, btw. (Is Arch good I’ve never looked into it)