Robust Mirror

I’d argue the earliest humans probably traded sex for protection via having a partner, which isn’t a resource or really a job anymore than “husband” would be considered a job.

But the value of these shells will fall

PlayStation making you pay for their highest sub tier just to access demos.

If someone doesn’t know the answer to something and they guess, or think they know the answer but don’t, they are wrong. If they do know the answer and intentionally give a wrong answer, they are lying.

If someone is in a competition or playing a game and they break a rule they didn’t know about, they made a mistake. If they do know the rules and break it, they are cheating.

Lying and cheating fundamentally requires intent. This is important no matter what you’re referring to. If a child gets something wrong, you should not get mad at them for lying. If they make a mistake in a game, you should not acuse them out cheating. There is a difference and it matters.

ChatGPT literally cannot think. It’s not sitting around contemplating it’s existence while waiting for inputs. It’s taking what you say, comparing that to everything that it’s been trained on, assigning a bunch of statistics, and outputting something based on more statistics that hopefully is correct and makes sense.

It doesn’t know if it makes sense. It doesn’t “know” anything. It’s just an incredibly sophisticated version of “if user inputs ‘Hi how are you’, respond ‘I am well, how are you?’”.

It can’t do things with intent. Therefore it cannot lie or cheat. It can simply output wrong or problematic text based on statistics.

In fairness, it was never legal to make thousands of copies of that VHS tape and hand them out en masse. Which is how you’re getting it when you download it, from someone doing exactly that.

I don’t think he captured what empathy is. What he says honestly aligns more closely with sympathy by my understanding.

Sympathy involves understanding and feeling sorry for someone’s situation, while empathy goes a step further, involving the ability to share and understand the emotions of another person. It’s almost always a one on one connection. You’re putting yourself in their shoes, personally.

Sympathy often includes a desire to offer solutions or assistance, while empathy is primarily about understanding and sharing emotions. Donating to a charity for the blind out of a sense of feeling sorry for them aligns more with sympathy, as it involves a compassionate response and a potential desire to provide support or solutions without necessarily fully understanding the blind individuals’ emotional experiences. It’s even less empathetic if you’re primarily doing it to feel good. I would personally classify it as altruism or personal fulfilment based on sympathy for their suffering.

I do agree with the general point that you can usually get more done if you pick a lane, I just don’t think the fact that people don’t pick a lane, because they want to feel good for helping many different causes, is based on misguided empathy. And I think it’s wrong to argue empathy is bad based on this premise.

Lastly, even if I’m entirely wrong and it is empathy, he’s only arguing against empathy being bad on a societal level. That does not mean it’s bad on a one on one level such as when talking to a friend, family member or partner. Arguing that ALL empathy is bad just because using empathy to make decisions on “how best to help the world” is bad is incredibly inaccurate.

I had a teacher in high school tell us that glass is an incredibly slow moving liquid, and that’s why on really old buildings the glass is thicker at the bottom, because it has flowed and “pooled” like that.

I believed that for a good number of years and even repeated it a few times before finding out that no, it’s not, and the reason some old glass is like that is simply because of the manufacturing process at the time, and that it was simply installed thick side down for aesthetic reasons, and that you can actually find old glass that is thicker at the side or top because it was installed differently.

Probably something like pronounce or proclaim.

OK ok, what if I tone it down to, I still have to make it, but it will always be perfectly done, never over or under rcooked what I intended.

If I had a supper power, it’d be the ability to conjure the most delicious and satisfying meals instantly.

You say pickle like peekle?

You could implement this for some shows and movies, but there’s one big problem. Disney shouldn’t have exclusivity rights to their own IPs? Netflix should have to give everyone else the shows they pay for and produce?

I get where you’re coming from in theory, but in practice it doesn’t make sense. It would be like saying Nintendo must release their games on xbox and playstation.

You know, I knew that, and I really don’t know how that happened. In any case thanks.

I will concede that it would make some things easier, like if someone says are you busy on the 5th, you can instantly know the 5th is a Friday or whatever. But I still don’t like it. And without researching in detail, I’m betting there are holidays, particularly religious ones, that wouldn’t be okay with moving the date to match the weekend closest to it for reasons.

The main hiccup is the system is off by a day. Some people “fix” this by saying the extra day should be “new years day” or something similar that exists outside the main calendar and doesn’t have an actual date or day assigned to it. Personally I think that’s kind of silly but it does work.

The second problem which to me is a much bigger problem, is he argues every month starting on Monday is a feature, I think it’s a bug. The result of this is every date is the same day, every year. If you are born on a Wednesday, your birthday will always be on a Wednesday. I like it mixing up and getting to have your birthday on different days.

Also almost everyone will have a new birthday they have to learn and too many people would simply be unwilling to go along with that.

And all that is ignoring the monumental task of changing every computer system in the world.

Edit: also 13 is just kind of a rubbish number to work with and doesn’t divide into anything nicely.

I think the biggest problem is how does the landlord break lease? Because if you can be kicked out you lose all that you’ve accumulated against your will. If you can’t be evicted, you’ve forced the landlord to both keep you as a renter and keep ownership of the property until it’s paid by the renter, which isn’t necessarily realistic.

They should be able to sell the property if they need to. The person renting being part of the transaction and forced to be allowed to continue renting is only kind of a solution, because the new owners might want to live in that house, or have a say in who rents it. There’s also the issue of funds already accumulated by the landlord. Does that get deducted off the price they sell it for?

I think there’s just a few too many veriables for it to work as a solution.

I browse social media to find new ideas that I can’t think of.

Couldn’t agree more.