• 0 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 18th, 2024

help-circle
  • In honesty (my last comment was clearly not legit), you likely do pronounce the ‘L’; most accents will include this in my experience.

    Does the tip of your tongue touch the roof of your mouth just on or behind the ridge before your front teeth? If you release your tongue before pronouncing the ‘D’ is there a release of air? If you do position your tongue here and there is no release of air before pronouncing the ‘D’ (which does release air), then you are pronouncing the ‘L’.







  • Anyone can be a martyr; all you need to do is believe your cause has more value than your own life. However, we have another word for someone who believes their cause has more value than the lives of innocent bystanders. Yahya Sinwar was a terrorist.

    Sinwar won’t be remembered as a martyr, he will be remembered as a selfish fool. There is no doubt in my mind that more Palestinians would be alive today if Yahya Sinwar were never born.


  • This is a fair assessment. I actually like politics, but I have still blocked numerous political communities because the users spam variations of the exact same 2 articles over, and over, and over, and over again.

    It’s either going to be:

    1. Trump be stoopid
    2. Israel be bad

    The first few times were interesting, now it’s just effing annoying. Blocking these communities has definitely improved my Lemmy experience.



  • Here’s my first attempt at that prompt using OpenAI’s ChatGPT4. I tested the same prompt using other models as well, (e.g. Llama and Wizard), both gave legitimate responses in the first attempt.

    I get that it’s currently ‘in’ to dis AI, but frankly, it’s pretty disingenuous how every other post about AI I see is blatant misinformation.

    Does AI hallucinate? Hell yes. It makes up shit all the time. Are the responses overly cautious? I’d say they are, but nowhere near as much as people claim. LLMs can be a useful tool. Trusting them blindly would be foolish, but I sincerely doubt that the response you linked was unbiased, either by previous prompts or numerous attempts to ‘reroll’ the response until you got something you wanted to build your own narrative.


  • Can’t help but notice that you’ve cropped out your prompt.

    Played around a bit, and it seems the only way to get a response like yours is to specifically ask for it.

    Honestly, I’m getting pretty sick of these low-effort misinformation posts about LLMs.

    LLMs aren’t perfect, but the amount of nonsensical trash ‘gotchas’ out there is really annoying.


  • Affidavit@lemm.eetovegan@lemmy.worldRecent happenings
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’ve been humming and harring about whether to block this community over the past week, but the sheer orangeness of your post has me convinced. Orange is the best.

    I will remain for now.

    Edit: do you usually keep your salt and pepper shakers on the stove???





  • Affidavit@lemm.eetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldThat explains it.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Edit: it’s both extremely telling and extremely concerning how much my rational take on consent is triggering all these pathetic men.

    Your initial comment was rational, it was well-thought out and you made a fair point while ending the comment on a positive note. Left alone, I would have upvoted your well-considered opinion and moved on.

    However, your follow up responses and your edit were unprovoked ad hominem sexist attacks where you assume everyone who disagrees is a mansplaining penis-wielder whose words have less value than your own. While having your views challenged can be confronting, responding in the manner you are only detracts from your argument.





  • Affidavit@lemm.eetovegan@lemmy.worldThat is not vegan.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The title is presumptuous and does not encourage a healthy debate.

    Historically, etymologically, are bivalves vegan? No, they are obviously not. But are you vegan because you are a linguist? Or are you vegan because you want to minimise the harm that you cause while continuing to live and thrive as a moral person? Limiting veganism to simplistic, poorly considered ideas such as what kingdom of organism they fall into is lazy and ill-considered. Like every other word in the English language, veganism is not bound to its original meaning.

    I researched bivalves some time ago and decided, personally, that there just wasn’t enough information (that I could interpret) available to me to determine whether they experienced pain, suffering, or any form of higher thought process. I decided that I would refrain from eating bivalves, as I just wasn’t sure.

    However, there are plants out there that are more sophisticated, and seemingly more intelligent, than organisms in the Animalia kingdom (e.g. most jellyfish).

    I don’t eat bivalves because I am unsure. I don’t eat jellyfish because they taste like nothing. I don’t eat honey, because bees clearly have some level of sentience. Idgaf about what some person in 1944 decided as the meaning of the word ‘vegan’ (though I respect the intent).

    Many of the comments in this thread are criticising solely on the etymological basis of the word ‘vegan’ rather than the actual ethical consideration of the issue.

    The question for these people, ‘are you vegan because you genuinely care about the impact you have, or do you care more about rigid definitions with little consideration of the actual meaning?’