🤣

Right, because only women are the problem, and men are paragons of virtue.

Fuck off

Well, not so much preventing as actively inhibiting. Technically, that order only applies to models used by the federal government, but it does create a perverse business incentive that I suspect is highly likely to have a chilling effect on the industry as a whole.

But I agree things are accelerating in the wrong direction, and regulations were needed years ago to prevent the upcoming shitshow.

Wow.

Just…wow.

You honestly think that’s an argument?!?

Goodbye

No. You’re dodging the argument. You chose to phrase it that way. And pretending that’s just some incidental thing with no meaning honestly is about the dumbest response I’ve seen in a while.

You have made the argument that it is the American people, not the administration. You. Not anybody else.

That…what???

No, your choice of phrasing conveys your message.

If you’re argument is not against the American people, but rather the administration, then your wording is, well, wrong.

Whoa. Seriously? So if we’re not talking about sports you seriously just believe men are better than women.

Yeah goodbye. I’m done with you

There is plenty of empirical data to show that the best men are better than the best women.

Wow.

We could pretend that you forgot to say something about “when it comes to sports” or some other kind of qualifier, but we all know that’d be a lie.

So, thank you for proving my point. It is truly just sad and pathetic the way you try to pretend like you even know empirical data means.

Take your bigotry and shove a back up your ass where it belongs.

(Did you really think that quoting an extremely widely discredited study that did not involve any empirical data whatsoever was some kind of gotcha? Jesus Christ, that’s just pathetic)

For the record, obsessing over other people’s genitalia is just fucking weird.

We all know you what you really meant:

“Stop drawing conclusions from empirical data, it interferes with my prejudice and bigotry.”

Or, did you actually think you were courageously taking a stand for…what, exactly? Being a jerk?

Did it really never occur to you that choosing to let your ignorant fear shape your perspective makes you weak??

No, they did not use an algorithm to make the decisions. They are making the choices, but, being the feckless cowards they are, they’re actually trying to set it up so they can hide behind a fucking computer program.

Sigh …

Yup. I always wondered what evolutionary advantage resulted in that type of thing happening. Now it feels a bit obvious, although of course nature is crazy complex, so now I wonder what other environmental factors would also lead to that sorta stuff happening. But if there’s deadwood piled up to the point it would choke off new growth, obviously don’t reproduce until it burns away.

Was trying to find info about a certain domain the other day - damn near impossible just cause all the results I could find was the same type of AI slop.

Well, they’re far from only player in this field. Guess they better make sure they’re paid up with the right people.

Oh it could easily have been that. I’m no expert at programming, but I know enough to be aware of some of the weird things that you gotta get right behind the scenes. There’s a lot of moving parts that gotta stay synchronized, more than a lot of folks realize.

Edit: I guess in other words, just cause it sounds simple and straightforward does not mean it is easy to implement. In fact, the opposite can often be true in that there may be surprisingly complex things needed under the hood to make sure the visible result “just works”.

Well, in programming, garbage cleanup routines (which are important so data in memory that’s no longer needed is released - get it wrong and you either have a memory leak where the longer your app runs the more RAM it consumes, or you have bizarre bugs that are hard to replicate cause memory was released early) in general are actually quite tricky to get right, so usually you use APIs built into whatever programming language you’re using. You don’t have that luxury inside a video game’s environment. Imagine if they got it wrong and your character is mistakenly treated as some dead monster and poof it’s gone.

Wasn’t there some effort to guide that particular evolution? Or was it really just one of those,“holy shit look at this” discoveries?

Now my curiosity is piqued; I may have to look that up later today.

Suddenly it makes sense why some trees only disperse seeds after a forest fire.

Or, you know, just sits on my face. Like, anytime she wants…

there can conceivably be toxic forms of empathy.

certainly aren’t toxic when they’re based in empathy and compassion

Pick a lane? I mean no offense, but I did kinda feel like I had a stroke trying to follow your argument.

The way I see it, “toxic empathy” is self contradicting, which is a regular tactic of fascist propaganda. The whole point is to interfere with the listeners’ ability to approach their argument with reason and logic, leaving them more vulnerable to emotional manipulation.

Anyway, I’ll just go ahead and say it: no, there is no such thing as “toxic empathy”. It’s a meaningless word salad to dress their appeal to emotion up to look like some kinda of reasoned argument (but only if you don’t look to close, which of course a radical will do everything to avoid).