Hmm yeh that’s definitely a pressure point issue there. I guess I do self-censor somewhat in that I know the type of reception that can be expected on that topic if not following the orthodoxy so unless I’m prepared to vigorously defend something I have to say on it, then I generally don’t say much on it, wouldn’t want to go in half-cocked or try to persuade any one of anything unless I was pretty sure it was a new insightful take that might be able to ride above the fray and bridge some fundamental disagreements.

From my perspective, it’s difficult to say how your comments exactly contravene this rule 1 as stated directly. But then you did go ahead and suggest Russia should be wiped off the map as part of your defence of why it isn’t reasonable to use corruption as a pretext to wipe another country off the map. I think suggesting that as a fait acompli conclusion and the only option was bound to raise a few eyebrows and while it doesn’t neatly explicitly fit the categories mentioned in rule 1, I guess one could say that that suggestion dances around a mixture of 3 of them. Maybe someone was trying to shoehorn the statement in to one of the existing rules as pretext.

Flubber 1997 Not because it was such a memorably great trailer, but just because it was so misleading. I don’t want to watch that shitty movie all over again just to verify my claims but what I recall was, there were entire scenes or shots in the trailer that weren’t in the movie at all, and they were kind of the best bits. I definitely expected a lot more crazy hijinks and time spent in the flying car with sentient mischievous green goo then what I remember ending up with. The whole flubber material having some will of its own too I seem to recall was a much less prominent aspect of the movie than was implied, it seemed to be just goo most of the time. So much screen time was spent worrying about the Professor’s marriage and conflict with the University faculty, which was so boring for a kid especially when they marketed it so heavily and I was given to expect so different. Don’t know if I’d have liked the 60’s version better, from what I read and see in the trailer it does look like pretty much the same movie so likely suffered the same issues.

I’m sure I remembered it being easier, but basically if you access the Lemmy instance in question via a browser rather than an app (might work on apps too but not mine), there’s a modlog link at the bottom of the page which shows you the mod activity generally, and then on that page you can filter by user and type the name of the user who’s modlog you’d like to see.

When it comes up, which isn’t too often, I find I’m not really the model archetypal .ml user in outlook and have run afoul of a few people that took exception to that there, but that came in the form of angry comments about the thing I said and either the literal meaning of it or sometimes what they took it to mean, and for a forum that seems entirely appropriate. I was briefly banned from one of the communities there once too because I was accused of being a bot. Funnily enough I actually didn’t notice that and it had been overturned by the time found out there was a modlog and figured this out.

It would be hard for me to know obviously, but based on this experience, it doesn’t seem to me that they’re particularly ban-happy, particularly not instance wide. Kind of a bummer that happened to you. I’m fairly happy basing my account there and speaking my mind when I see fit. I do pick up the prevailing winds and can accurately presume what would and wouldn’t be taken well, but I don’t generally feel a need to self-censor or worry about bans.

If one really dug through my history before this comment and probably in to the future when I’ve long forgotten about it you’d probably find examples of me not practicing what I’m about to preach but, to an extent no one really is a loser because the term is subjective and meaningless in any practical sense. People might do “loser” things sometimes or even constantly, but still have capacity for change or posess redeeming factors that make them worth time and energy to at least someone. The question is whether they’re worth your time and energy, and whether you have reason to want them to redeem themselves in your eyes.

If your father had been a much nicer spoken man, and also stayed with your mother, but still had the terrible money management and bad financial situation would you still feel inclined to call him a loser? Someone with no attachment to him and whose personal criteria for casting someone in to that bucket centres around material wealth might, but his own children maybe less so. As it happens he has been bad with money, has made a lot of decisions you disapprove of and persists in interacting with you in a reprehensible manner so it’s entirely understandable why you might not like him very much or feel much reason to indulge him or invest in a relationship with him. To me that’s enough, his “loserdom” status is immaterial, in fact it’s a distraction, because if you ever DID change your mind and wanted to attempt to repair the relationship, such value judgements might be hard to cast aside once they’re allowed to calcify and such a change of mind won’t be about his worth based on some extrinsic, arbitrary label but instead about what he is and continues to be to you.

It’s an interesting question though because I guess if the files being zipped are already nearly or maximally compressed then I’d assume that the zip of all those files actually was in some extremely tiny negligible way, actually slightly larger than those files on their own.

/thread

If you managed to rig up the LLM to operate on forums I assume that means you have control over it and are operating it on your own metal so you can probably make it swear without compunction.

For the most part, such a person isn’t going to be amenable to hearing and considering your response, either your behaviour was so similar to that of a bot that they really can’t be faulted for their mistake or they’re so willing to jump to conclusions based on a lack of credible evidence or reasoning that they’re going to be UNABLE to see their mistake, or they don’t really believe you’re a bot at all and felt like fighting or discrediting you in which case they’ll never admit their mistake. In all those scenarios the investment of time and attention you’d pay to just… some guy… who is wrong, intentionally or otherwise, is entirely at odds with the returns you’d ever get or chances of success.

It can be fun sometimes to lean in to it though, that’s mostly cost free because they’ll either see you’re taking the piss out of them and conclude you’re not a robot and also just made them look stupid, or they’ll still carry on as before and look stupid for basically hysterically wailing “YOU’RE A BOT”… at a bot, an entirely futile endeavour.

123 Fake St

I don’t really care and I have a GOOD relationship with my parents. I’m not really sure how this genre of insult came to be or why people don’t generally find it just kinda funny. It’s weird because unless that person personally knows either of your parents then you know for a fact that whatever they’re saying about them is entirely irrelevant and given the context where this is happening is usually one of animosity anyway, there’s no kind of base level respect that you have for the person who says these things or their opinions so no real reason to care about anything they say.

I think maybe they’re supposed to work on the level of it being a kind of public humiliation thing in the sense that the ‘honour’ of your parents is somehow impugned but since no reasonable person can possibly take what they’re saying seriously that’s really not a major concern and if they truly did have a problem with them I rather think that’s an issue they should take up with my parents because it has nothing to do with me anyway.

I’m surprised they don’t wait for you to hit the submit button before dropping this on you so people feel invested and motivated to do as they’re told because of the sunk cost in time and effort writing the review.

No no, the chairs or tables will be absolved of duty, so like they’ll still be around, taking up space, we just won’t be allowed to ask anything useful of them anymore because they’re retired.

do you one better

Well thought out lol. You should get a genie, I think you’ll be prepared.

But the thing is, if they do the thing you asked in a way where it’s noticeable that they only did it because you asked, then they are signalling to you that they understood, which is a form of communication and the word used was “communicate” with animals.

Hmm, but are they immune to this restriction?

Haha imagine trying to explain that to people.

“I have a superpower, I can speak to animals they just can’t speak back”

“But everyone has that superpower, I can do that too”

“Yeh but I’m actually really talking to them, like in their language that they can understand”

“How do you know?”

“…”

I think it’s getting about the level of attention as the person who started doing it hoped it would, which is about as much as possible. That attention is definitely going to run the gamut but it’s the internet so plenty of it’s going to be hate. Every time I see it I’m split between knee-jerk “that’s stupid” and then a begrudging sense of affection for someone’s commitment to pointless contrarianism and quirkiness. With the right mental framing it’s at different times annoying and endearing.

I don’t know somehow GiGa just works but GiGantic wouldn’t have. I think you instinctively made the right choice even if you didn’t mean to