Android
Come to the rest of the world, no problems here .
Removed by mod
Systemd apparently. Every time someone brings it up, the thread devolves into a religious flame war.
I’ve never got this either. I’ve been using Linux exclusively for over 4 years, multiple devices, tested dozens of distros, almost all Systemd-based and I havent ever experienced any problems that the anti-systemd folks talk about.
Or at least, they were so rare and minimal that I didn’t notice.
Coming from an IT background dealing with 99% Windows machines and Microsoft products, maybe my bar was on the floor, but Linux has been soooo much more stable and dependable than Windows.
Been using Linux since 2004 and systemd has made my life significantly easier. People bickering about systemd are usually ultra nerds without arguments real people would consider important.
I remember in my coding class when the prof claimed the language we were learning didn’t have GOTO, but it also didn’t need it because anything that could be accomplished with GOTO could be accomplished with loops and conditionals.
Now looking back I can’t believe what a tech debt nightmare goto is, and I’m glad I weaned off it.
Startup scripts seem more powerful because they’re code you know will be executed sequentially. For a developer that feels nice.
But a declarative system like systemd is so much more predictable and stable, specifically because it does NOT allow for sequential execution of code.
Once I made that switch I was a fan. It’s so much more predictable and standardized.
I agree. Coming from the Windows world, systemd felt quite familiar compared to other components in a typical linux system, I always liked it. It doesn’t really follow the unix philosophy though, so it gets a lot of hate.
F*ck the Unix philosophy, this is Linux, not Unix.
fUcK sYsTeMd ItS fAsCiSt BuLlShIt If ThEAy PuT iT iN lInUx AnD tAkE oUr FrEeDoM i WiLl SwItCh To BsD uMmM IdK wHaT iT dOeS rEaLlY sOmEtHiNg WiTh SeRvIcEs I gUeSs FuCk SyStEmD!!11!!
Pineapple pizza.
Fucking war criminal
Is it much different from other savory food that comes with a sweet side dish? Just as cranberry fits to venison, the taste of pineapple fits the ham those pizze typically are covered with.
Rick Astley. I never really got the point of people getting mad at Never Gonna Give You Up, if anything getting rickrolled is a nice surprise to me.
Cilantro and onions. Y’all wouldn’t last a day in Mexico.
For the longest time I didn’t even know what cilantro tasted like. I thought maybe it tasted like nothing to me. The reason for this was once when my wife and I were at a Mexican restaurant, I got some green salsa. I dipped my chip in and complained to my wife that it tasted like nothing. She dipped a chip in and started gagging. She said it tasted like pure liquid cilantro.
One day I was cutting some cilantro for some tacos I was making at home, and I took a big bite. It didn’t taste like nothing to me. I just always associated the flavor with lime because anytime I have something with cilantro, I always squeeze a lime over it.
I always thought that was mildly interesting.
Unfortunately I have the gene, but onions are great though.
I’m here to represent the “Cilantro Tastes Like Soap, But I Like That!” crew.
Fuck off tankie
How about you take a second to think about your response here. We are talking about onions and cilantro not politics.
I don’t even remember posting in this thread so I have no idea what you are talking about.
One of these is true:
- Your account was hacked…
- You have a serious memory issue.
- Saying hateful, rude stuff is something you do so commonly you can’t even keep track of the instances.
Pretty much all of those are problems that you should deal with.
You told someone to fuck off for being a tankie in your eyes while we were talking about cilantro and onions. It’s out of place.
Oh I’m quite aware, tomatoes too.
Every little bit I eat them to see if I like them (or can force myself to) but I just haven’t been able to yet. I really wish I could just get over my dislike but I can’t seem to enjoy the taste.
I saw someone commenting how they specifically don’t like “raw tomatoes”. I was wondering why you’d be eating raw tomatoes to begin with but they just meant like regular tomatoes, ones you haven’t cooked since for them the cooked ones were the norm. And it had so many people agreeing with them about how “raw tomatoes” are disgusting.
It’s a weird world out there.
I also don’t like raw tomatoes, but cooked ones are okay.
I’d interpret ‘regular tomatoes’ as something non-heirloom.
I’d call “raw” tomatoes, as in regular eatable ones as just regular tomatoes. Raw to me sounds like unripe. While prepared, I guess that is self-explanatory. But I guess that’s more about cultural or language differences.
What do you not like about “raw” (I guess it is now warranted since there’s ambiguity, so fair enough) tomatoes? I think they’re the tits! First time I hear the term “heirloom tomatoes” btw.
Raw means uncooked, not unripe. They taste sharper and have their skins on, and the seeds are with their gel and juice, between the firm fleshy parts. When tomatoes are cooked, often the first step is to drop them in boiling water for a minute, take them out, and slide the skins off. Because the skin gets tough when cooked. The other thing that happens in cooking is that the flesh softens and the seeds migrate so it’s all more or less the same texture. The flavor gets sweeter too.
Personally I like raw tomatoes and cooked equally, but they are different.
Just sounds so weird, people calling regular tomartoes “raw” lmao. Is that a thing somewhere in the world, maybe the US? They like their stuff factory done lol
Raw cherry tomatoes or grape tomatoes would go along with raw carrots and raw celery and raw cauliflower and raw bell peppers and other raw vegetables on a crudité platter. Guess what “cru” and “crudités” means in French?
The point being that these are all vegetables that can also be served cooked. (Unlike lettuce which is ruined by cooking. I tried it once, blech.) But when dipping, you want that firmness and fresh taste.
It’s not a US thing, or anything special, you just seem to have an exaggerated idea of what the word raw means. Maybe you’re confused because it can also mean naked (“in Equus, he appeared on stage in the raw”) or chafed/chapped (“his nose was red and raw from the snowstorm”) or unedited/unfiltered (“the raw data suggests Hillary Clinton will win the 2016 election”). But in this case it just means uncooked/unheated. It could be sliced and spiced and still be raw.
Btw, we don’t default to cooked or canned tomatoes, we would specify those as well, for instance in a pasta or chili recipe.
I was shocked to discover the hatred the old live action Mario movie gets. I enjoyed it when it came out when I was a kid. I rewatched it as an adult to see if my memory was faulty… still enjoyed it. It’s a little campy, but it’s a fun romp! I unironically enjoy it, as a good movie and not as a “so-bad-it’s-good” movie. And yet it gets so much hate…
The Last Jedi.
I left the theater on opening night thrilled with what I saw. I couldn’t wait to go online and read all the positive reactions and theories for the next one… Whelp.
Compassion and empathy for animals. Yeah, they say they like it if you don’t have any follow-up questions, but things go downhill real fuckin’ fast after that.
It’s peak cognitive dissonance that most people struggle with due to years of social conditioning and lobbying. You can’t even publish the shit in the news any more. Add to the fact a lot of people just don’t think about shit at all, and it is a reality most people don’t want to see when confronted. Frustrating to say the least.
I think they don’t struggle with the cognitive dissonance unless you really rub their nose in it, because there is hundreds of years of culture dedicated to finding the psychological tricks and mythology that allow them to relieve the tension without alleviating the cause.
Watch so-called dog people turn beet red in an instant when you try to point out that they are literally enslaving a sentient creature with feelings, who has been bred over hundreds of generations in inhumane conditions, resulting incountless congenital health problems, in order to produce a docile beast who can simulate affection and is literally miserable for the rest of the day when their human isn’t with them.
But no, they say, Mr. Floof is happy! He’s just shitting the bedroom floor and digging compulsively because that’s what dogs do. Sorry Floof, I can’t walk you today, now go run your ruts in the tiny yard and pretend this plastic toy is an animal you hunted.
Communism and empathy for other creatures (humans included.)
The idea that we ought to improve society somewhat, even while participating in it.
Polyamory. I knew a lot of people didn’t understand, but the visceral disgust at the idea that a lot of people have is surprising.
This is so strange to me. Not the polyamory, the weird hate of it. I’m in a monogamous relationship and polyamory just doesn’t appeal to me. But I don’t really give a shit about what other people do or who they fuck as long as it’s consentual.
Well, granted my sample size is extremely small, but I’ve only ever known 2 polyamorous groups of people well enough to visit their home. And in both cases, there was always 1 person who wasn’t as happy as the other two and was tolerating the scenario due to pressure from the person they considered their ‘significant other’.
The dynamic was: A & B would be considered spouses to each other, A wants to bring in additional person C and create a trio under the banner of “polyamory” and B consents (because they are willing to accommodate anything A wants to make A happy). So person C enters the relationship and they form a polyamorous-trio, but instead of it being a true trio, it’s more like A & B still have their relationship (now burdened) and A & C have a relationship, but B & C don’t engage much. This is the exact scenario I have witnessed in the only 2 households I’ve ever known doing it.
That’s given me the impression that arrangements like that usually serve the needs of one or two people but often leave at least one party secretly unhappy. Maybe if more people actually witnessed polyamory working as it’s been proclaimed, there would be higher opinions of arrangements like that. But I sure haven’t seen it - my current conclusion is that it’s just not within the bounds of human nature for this kind of relationship to work.
A “V” is a perfectly legitimate arrangement. In fact, those who demands the two other sides of the V to have any kind of relationship, even mere friendship, are considered toxic. And living together is forcing the issue.
Here I am surprised that a person is surprised that non-preferred sexual acts would trigger visceral disgust.
I mean, sex is actively disgusting unless your partner just happens to have the right combination of signals to transform it into something non-disgusting.
The wonder is that any sex ever is seen as non-disgusting.
Polyamory is not group sex.
Actually, if you don’t take care of yourself in polyamorous relationships, you might have less sex than in monoamorous relationships.
Also, no, consensual sex is not disgusting. You might not want it, but then sex is not consensual. Bodies are not inherently disgusting.
ehhh bodies are pretty gross. teeth in places mashin up stuff, grimy bacteria in all the folds and crevasses, stinky sweaty fluids and excretions, there’s tons of stuff in the human body that is either conceptually quite horrifying or that we are downright neurologically programmed to be disgusted by. the eroticism of it all really just allows us to look past the disgust and see desire, joy, pleasure. that’s the subjective element.
that dude was dumb for thinking polyamory is a sex act though lol
Streaming videos on my phone using speaker for audio while at the restaurant eating lunch. I figured for sure, everyone would want to get in on that awesome stand-up comedy action or zany talk show that I enjoy with my meal. It turns out that (gasp!) some people even think it’s rude…LOL.
To those people who say you can’t express sarcasm over text.
Fucking really? Can you not see it here either?
Large Language Models (such as GPT) and AI image generators.
I follow certain AI related post tags on Tumblr and sometimes I see people expressing pure hatred towards these tools, as they only see the AIs as content thieves.
It’s not that I hate it, but like, chatGPT sucks.
There was this uber hype around it, then we started using it … and it just makes so many errors, it’s literally just generating more work. Scrapped it after less than a week. It’s modern snakeoil.
I don’t mind the tool itself if you use it as such. I do mind when people use its output as the final product. See: the lawyer who used chatgpt for a legal brief
they only see the AIs as content thieves.
AI is a method of content theft, it takes other people’s work and pieces it together in a way that resembles other works, without any actual coherency.
I don’t like that it churns out slop that displaces actual content.
I also don’t like the way it’s sped up enshitification of google and news sites. I didn’t think it could get worse than pages of listicles written by disinterested journalists paid fuckall to churn out 10 a day, but now you have chatGPT churning out 100 completely useless articles a day.
LLMs just automates and does faster certain things that a person could do on their own if they invested way more effort and time. If a human being takes people’s work and pieces it together in a way that resembles other works without using any LLM/AI or automation tool, is the final result content theft too?
I agree with the content enshitification, but I disagree about the coherency.
Usually, implementations like the ChatGPT web/app will generate different outputs for the same prompt/input. You can also ask it to tweak a previous output, make it shorter, more concise, exclude parts, etc. And if you’re making API calls through a script you can tweak parameters like the Temperature, Top P, Presence Penalty or Frequence Penaly, which affect things like the coherence, randomness or repetitiveness of the output.
There’s also fine tunning using embeddings, which can help training a model to fit one’s specific needs and expectations, but I haven’t got to try it yet.
If a human being takes people’s work and pieces it together in a way that resembles other works without using any LLM/AI or automation tool, is the final result content theft too?
Yes, obviously. Artists and writers can learn from others and can be inspired by other’s works, but they can’t use parts of those works. That is content theft. Imitating a style is fine, but you have to create something new. LLMs cannot create, only steal.
If, for example, I ask an LLM to produce a short story with a completely unique and random prompt that doesn’t resemble any known existing story in its training data (or in the entire world, if you like), is the generated output of the LLM also stolen?
I think what you’re proposing isn’t something they can do. Are you saying “What if I asked it to create a short story who’s pieces don’t resemble any pieces of known stories?” or are you saying “What if I asked it to create a short story who’s whole doesn’t resemble any known stories?”
The first one can’t happen. The second? Yes, it’s stealing.
Where is it getting this story? LLMs don’t have creativity. They don’t understand story structure. It pulls sentences and paragraphs from work in it’s training data. If the generated output contains work that others have made, that’s called plagiarism. If it doesn’t, then your hypothetical isn’t realistic. LLMs can’t create original works. That’s the whole point. It pulls pieces of the training data and rearranges them. It would be like if I was writing a college paper and instead of writing anything myself I just pulled 100 different sources and copied a sentence or two from each source and structured them as my paper. That’s 100% plagiarism.
I was referring to producing a unique plot.
The process of generating a story involves recombining and rephrasing the LLM’s training data in unique ways, it’s not a copypaste job. They generate content by predicting and generating text based on patterns, an this implicates a degree of transformation and synthesis.
Where do you draw the line between plagiarism vs inspiration, whether it’s a person or an LLM? How long and similar to something existing does a fragment of text have to be to cross the plagiarism line?
I disagree about the coherency.
Coherency requires relating symbolic meanings. AI just uses statistical analysis.
Consider if you were locked in the national library of Thailand. You don’t speak Siamese, and any pictures or bilingual dictionaries were removed.
Given a thousand years, you could look at the patterns and produce text similar to what someone who writes Siamese would write, but there’s still no coherency because you cannot connect the meaning behind any of the words.
That doesn’t necessarily mean your outputs are useless though, someone who does read Siamese can have you generate outputs until you print out something they can infer a coherent thought from, but you’re fundamentally unable to be trained to do that yourself.
If a human being takes people’s work and pieces it together in a way that resembles other works without using any LLM/AI or automation tool, is the final result content theft too?
We’re getting into ethics territory. IP is a social construct and we live under capitalism, our model for determining what is and isn’t theft should be selected by what supports artists and consumers against capitalists.
Given a thousand years, you could look at the patterns and produce text similar to what someone who writes Siamese would write, but there’s still no coherency because you cannot connect the meaning behind any of the words.
That doesn’t necessarily mean your outputs are useless though, someone who does read Siamese can have you generate outputs until you print out something they can infer a coherent thought from, but you’re fundamentally unable to be trained to do that yourself.
You’re comparing an LLM to something similar to the infinite monkey theorem. In your analogy, you should consider that someone who knows perfect Siamese is giving me feedback to optimize and improve my outputs, even I don’t really know the meaning of anything.
While an LLM may not have a conscience to evaluate if its output is coherent, it can identify patterns and relationships from its training and can generate text that is still appears coherent to human readers.
I like them as non-profit tools for personal use, but the hatred is justified IMO because we’re already seeing people with writing jobs lose that job and get replaced by an LLM and an “editor” who is paid less than the writer was.
Also, for stuff like art competitions and magazines, there is a need to develop a rigorous method of verification of what is and isn’t AI-generated. I’ve been published in a magazine before, but if I were to submit a story now I’d be competing against a massive wave of generated stories.
I like them as non-profit tools for personal use, but the hatred is justified IMO because we’re already seeing people with writing jobs lose that job and get replaced by an LLM and an “editor” who is paid less than the writer was.
That’s capitalism in all of its glory. People never mattered to the ones who want to make money; they just want want to as much profit as possible with the minimal investment. Someone at work created a tool that turns a work day of painstating tasks into a 5 minute wait? Fire the people, keep the tool. You may call LLMs or AIs enablers, but it’s like hating baseball bats because some use them to crack open skulls instead of hitting baseballs.
Regarding the verification of AI-generated content, I just can say I agree, but it’s going to be hard to detect.
Biomutant.
Was still thinking of giving it a shot, especially now that I got it for free through PS Plus.
1991 Hook with Robin Williams. I love that movie, but it seems that most people I encounter that didn’t grow up with it think it’s lame and boring.
So maybe not hate, but not love either.
RUFIOOOOOO
Didn’t realize people didn’t like it.
