In my mind, I acknowledge that i only ever wanted to have sex with women. But i would be an idiot to make being straight part of my identity because if I would ever meet a man that I could and would love, I would just have made it more difficult for me to accept that and there is zero gain in identifying as straight. I don’t think we need to identify our sexuality, we just need to be willing to accept ourselves and go with the flow.

Saying “I am 100% straight!” Seems to be a good way to have an identity crisis when you find someone attractive that doesn’t make you feel straight enough to accept it.

All but my work computer (they don’t let me) run some version of debian.

How am I gatekeeping?

I am not telling anyone to use Linux in anyway or to not use it in anyway. I am just pointing out that the average user wants a pretty/convenient gui and not the most efficient tool. That isn’t bad. I don’t want to eat some weird mixture of nutrients because it is optimal, I want to eat food that I enjoy eating.

I am calling out the weird focus on efficiency of software when the average user wants a good user experience. The user’s desire is not good nor bad, they just highlights that focusing on criticising efficiency of software is a strange thing to do, if the customer desires something else. It is like complaining that grindr is lacking heterosexual people.

I know. That is why I started my statement by stating that I don’t like the framing. It treats “efficiency” as the point of software. As the thing, that we should care about when judging software.

But it isn’t. It is user experience. And yes, efficiency is part of that. Both, efficiency in execution and efficiency of use.

And the user experience has improved a lot (ignoring intentional anti patterns to exploit the user that are fairly common, but i think we can agree to ignore that for the sake of the conversation)

I wish people would highlight the hypocrisy of the whole licensing/copyright issue and piracy issue.

E.g. From the terminal, I open a known file far more quickly then through an gui. Even if I want to use a gui for the file, issuing the opening command is quicker in the terminal.

GUIs often require the user to scan the interface to find the relevant information as the developer didn’t know what you are actually searching.

With a terminal, the user can be much more precise in what they seeking and consequently, less information is provided and less information needs to be scanned by the user.

The average user doesn’t want to remember and type a specific phrase to do something though. Even if it is “faster” and more “efficient”, the user want to be guided towards the information. The user wants a good user experience, not a fast/efficient one.

Pretty and guided, that is what the average user wants. Modern software is pretty and guided, not efficient and fast. Yes, developer became lazy in optimisation and like to use some big framework to save dev time. But the user also wanted it that way by wanting pretty GUIs because that is easier with the big frameworks.

It does because it highlights that instead of being excited to “have to use the terminal” as it is more “efficient” but instead they prefer the “slower” prettier gui. The user want the stupid animations and the flashy nonsense. The user doesn’t want quick software. They want pretty software.

I am not saying linux is terminal. I am saying that people tell you that linux is all terminal and that they want a gui.

Linux gui is much prettier than Windows anyway.

The terminal is quicker. Not because of the image is drawn more quickly but because it is more efficient to do anything.

I dislike a lot the framing of this.

Yes, the average software runs much less efficient. But is efficiency what the user want? No. It is not.

How many people will tell you that they stick to windows instead of switching to linux because linux is all terminal? And terminal is quicker, more efficient for most things. But the user wants a gui.

And if we compare modern gui to old gui… I don’t think modern us 15x worse.

I have 3 issues with nuclear power plants.

1. Centralised power generation is and will always be a focus of military conflict
2. Nuclear power plants are not fully covered by insurance because such an insurance is too expensive. So the risk calculation of insurance agencies tells them to not risk it.
3. No one wants nuclear plants in their area, or at least the storage sites.

And yet, people will tell me how nuclear is the way to go. They ignore all these reasons, while insisting that nuclear plants are safe.

This feels like when people tell you that we need to help the poor but they get mad when our taxes go up, and most of us don’t do shit for them on their own. It is so cheap to speak.

I don’t think highly of those misogyny groups that call themselves mra. But honestly, I have heard them complain about all these things.

But hey, sexist, who calling other sexist sexist, are still sexist and can fuck off.

The tech industry is effectively exclusively based in IP law, but to create LLMs they felt comfortable to completely ignore IP laws, and they will sue you if you would break IP law that favors them.

I think you are right and yet so wrong.

My problems with ai aren’t unique and I am no special snowflake who see through the matrix while everyone else is distracted. I am just a dude. I really doubt that the points tell I will bring up, is anything boring as generic arguments against ai.

My problem with data theft is not based on the concern that artists has the rights on their work. I want them rewarded for your labor but in this case, it is not my primary issue. It is the hypocritical nature of company entirely based in IP law stealing IP protected work. I hate that the system is not ripping them into piece like Nintendo rips an online super smash tournament into pieces. It is so obviously “rules for thee, not for me”. You can claim that capitalism is causing that but I really don’t think capitalism requires this shit. Sure the rich and powerful are rich and powerful in capitalism because of capitalism, but special pledging for the elite existed in every system we have tried.

I hate ai because people invest in the dumbest applications for it. LLM are trash. Voice cloner??? Wtf. Image generation? Why?? But for medical applications in which we have comparably amazing clean data, let’s invest into that a little bit. But x billions into LLMs please.

I hate ai because the most brain dead application gets the most usage and people will tell you how it is bad but use it anyway. Then they obviously don’t have the computing power to run a decent local model and just pipe any personal or confidential information into the online service that tells you that the data will be used for training, so it can be leaking back out to other people.

I hate ai because it is literally everything bad about society (e.g. nonconsental nudes) and tech (e.g. data collectors) and their interaction.

There was a case in which a monkey took a picture and the owner of the camera wanted to publish the photo. Peta sued and lost because an animal can’t hold any copyright as an human author is required for copyright.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute

As you also find in the wikipedia article, this case is used to argue that ai generated content is not by an human author and consequently not copyrightable.

I think you mostly confirmed my understanding. Thanks for your input.

Take care and stay safe.

Seriously, based on what i heard grindr makes it really really really easy to hook up. Like based on what I was told, you can find someone for now.

Now I might be wrong… but I don’t think someone looking for a relationship (and 500 bucks per month to spend it like that) will struggle to find someone to date. And if my information is correct, hooking up would be even easier.

So why would someone spend 500bucks per month on that.

Gay people, I need your input. Is my information correct?

He tried to make money by producing cp with grok.

That statement is true, not hyperbolic. He knew people would use his ai to produce cp and he put a price tag on it.

He is effectively saying specialised ai has a possible future and llm are a huge waste of time and money. But he doesn’t know that he is saying that.

I want to remind everyone, what his reaction was:

He disabled the image generation! But!!! only for free users!!! He saw the CP and thought, I am fine with it if they pay me for it.

i know, adult victims are important too. But let’s focus on the children.