sp3ctr4l
@sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- Comment on A little added bass to that song 9 hours ago:
I am trying to come up with a reason to mic a seat… none of them are good.
- Comment on My lips are sealed. 20 hours ago:
[Raises Hand]
… but you don’t have any lips.
- Comment on question for the culture 1 day ago:
… Wow, you’re serious.
Uh, because it engenders a whole bunch of deep emotions / massive and unique neurochemical responses in people, particularly it plays a massive role in regulating oxytocin, and plays a considerable role in creating stable pair bonding between two people.
mindlabneuroscience.com/brain-chemicals-during-se…
I’m genuienly baffled that you need this explained to you.
Apologies for using shorthand to refer to a whole bunch of complex neurochemistry, I’ll be sure to spell out the details next time.
- Comment on question for the culture 1 day ago:
‘Sacred’ has more colloquial meaning, and is more broad than purely as part of a religious doctrine.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sacred
5 a: unassailable, inviolable b: highly valued and important
I also provided a secondary phrase after that word, with or preceding it, to specify what I meant.
- Comment on fur sure 1 day ago:
I mean genuinely yes, this looks amazing.
- Comment on Anon runs into his boss 1 day ago:
Also you have functioning public mass transit where you can have someone else convey your drunk ass to the other side of town, for little to no expense.
- Comment on Lmao 1 day ago:
Ahem.
archive.org/…/the-hitch-hikers-guide-to-the-galax…
Not the PDF, but, also not not the book, technically.
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
Uh, no, I don’t.
The entire origination of my critique was against the claim that monogamy is unethical.
Thats… what started the entire thing.
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
You are confusing a subtype of monogamy with all possible variants of monogamy.
You’re describing patriarchichal, state/religiously sanctioned and ordained marriage.
I’m describing two people who are just having a relationship with each other, who discuss and agree to how that relationship works.
Doesn’t have to involve religion or even the state.
Just a commitment between two people.
I’ve gone to significant lengths to explain how yes, monogamy is often formalized in a fucked up way… but it doesn’t have to be.
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Hah, I haven’t written one, but maybe check out Arthur’s short story elsewhere in the comments!
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Augh!
You’re telling me there’s an Arthur C Clarke short that I missed?
Damnit I am losing so many nerd points today.
- Comment on Hee Hee Ho Ho Ha Ha 2 days ago:
I keep saying that actual literacy is a required prerequisite to media literacy… pretty scary how many people functionally can’t read these days.
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
All that complicated logic should in theory apply to all those relationships as well, but it does not.
It does though.
Your friends could say they don’t like your partner.
Your partner could say they don’t like your friends.
Your partner could love or hate the idea of you fucking one of your friends, etc.
When you involve sex and/or deep commitment as a partner, like, a life partner… emotions and condiserations get more complex and of greater magnitude.
So… the more people you are partnered with, the more people there are with strong and complex emotional considerations going all ways.
But anyway, none of this addresses my original critique:
You have not demonstrated that broadly, monogamous relationships are unethical, de facto, 100% of the time.
I don’t think nonmonogamy nor monogamy are inherently, de facto, all the time unethical.
I just think that nonmonogamy is more difficult to do ethically.
You said monogamy is unethical.
Do you still hold this view?
If so, why, for what reasons?
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Shit yeah go for it, I love those kinds of stories!
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Haven’t seen it yet, I appreciate the nonspoiling =D
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Hah, actually no I have not.
-1 nerd point lol
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
I think that its more difficult for a stable, persistent, nonmonogamous, romantic/sexual situation to persist mainly because there are more people involved.
Everything that would be a one to one discussion, is now A to B and A to C and B to C, and potentially A to BC and AB to C and AC to B… this gets more complex, geometrically, with more members.
With more people and no mandatory/imposed hierarchy, It complexifies, with more chances for miscommunication, with all the intensity of emotions that comes along with a serious relationship… which can often lead to drama.
I don’t think that this is conceptually difficult to do ethically, if everyone involved communicates very well.
But that almost never occurs in practice, in mono or nonmono setups.
I think it is difficult to do ethically in practice, moreso when there are more members, because people have emotions that cause them to do irrational things, they have limited amounts of time and energy, imperfect information, because people can change their minds about things, because sometimes people don’t really know why they do some things.
The more people you have in a persistent arrangement like this, the more complex and thus unstable the entire situation is.
Granted, that reasoning only applies to certain kinds of non monogamy, others are or can be less complex…
But basically my whole thrust here is that more people = more complicated = more chances for drama / intentionallly or unintentionally hurting other people.
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Ask your nearest Mormon about Kolob.
- Comment on Lmao 2 days ago:
Imagine a terrestrial planet that is Earthlike in all respects, but it simply has more persistent cloud cover, such that seeing an open cloudless sky is miraculously unlikely, as unlikely as humans seeing an asteroid impact.
No ground based astronomy.
No technological discoveries or culture that derives from ground based astronomy.
No celestial navigation on the ground.
Very different / stunted / more difficult cartography.
Technological civilization is capable of emerging, but it would not be able to well understand anything beyond the terra firma, not untill it generated aircraft capable of breaching the cloud cover layer, and thrmen developed airborne observatories.
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
And I appreciate your reply, though I do disagree.
(and for what its worth, i didnt downvote you)
I follow your food allergy metaphor, but this makes sense analogously only if you essentially do not view sex as any more sacred, or complex and meaningful, than food… you view it only as basic human need that is not entwined with the very emotional structure of a relationship.
Say that you’re both ostensibly members of a religion that forbids eating pork, or you’re both fairly hardcore vegans, and you in particular are also allergic to pork.
If your partner goes out and eats pork, away from you, yes this is not literally directly harmful to you, but it betrays the values that you both ostensibly claim to believe in.
Furthering the analogy, the partner could just say they’re not a member of that religion, or they’re not a vegan, or they have different interpretations of the concepts of those… and then you could say:
‘well, the beliefs that I have are important to me, and I thought that you had those same beliefs, and that they were important to you to… so if you do not have those beliefs, we should probably not be a couple.’
So, you have clarified your line of thinking, your preference or worldview or what you want to call it, but you have not explained how the preference or worldview that I explained is unethical.
I don’t inherently think that ENM or poly or relationship anarchy are inherently impossible to do ethically… I think they are difficult to do ethically, without causing a ton of drama, a lot of emotional distress and complexity… but i do not think they are just de facto unethical in concept.
I do agree with you that monogamous relationships very often are problematic in that they come with baggage by way of people having unstated assumptions of what the roles and rules are.
But this can be solved with forthright communication and actually discussing with the partner what those roles and rules are or should be.
That goes the same for nonmonogamous relationships, they’re just inherently more complex as they involve more people.
Tons of people are, imo, not emotionally mature enough, not honest enough with themselves, do not have the communication skills required to be in any kind of a serious relationship, monogamous or otherwise.
- Comment on question for the culture 2 days ago:
How is consensual monogamy unethical?
Like really, you seem to genuinely hold the opinion you do, please explain to me how two people mutually agreeing to trust, support, love and fuck just each other … how is that unethical?
Yes, of course historically the concept is full of examples of other practices that get attached to it that are definitely harmful and bad.
Yes, there absolutely are a good deal of people who force monogamy on others as a means of control, who are hypocrites that don’t even follow the same rules or standards they impose on others.
But how is it inherently unethical for a fair and mutual relationship between just two people to exist?
Some people are into open relationships, ENM, polycules, just being a single stud or unicorn, etc.
Some people, arguably most people, either strongly prefer or can only emotionally handle having a single serious romantic relationship with one other person at a time.
The entire thing about cheating in a monogamous relationship is that it is lying, it is a massive breach of trust and respect.
If everyone involved is informed and onboard with expanding the relationship, that’s one thing… cheating is another.
For quite a lot of people, its not primarily that they want to posses or control their partner’s genitals.
Its that they want to be able to very thoroughly trust and relate to a single other person, to be the sole person that their partner also sees that way.
For these kinds of people, if their partner asked to open up the relationship, and they weren’t comfortable with it, they’re totally able to just realize at that point that their partner doesn’t want what they want, and just end the monogamous relationship, let their now former partner go pursue what they want.
So… how is this unethical?
- Comment on Anon judges gaming servers 3 days ago:
To be fair, there absolutely were Christian servers back in the old days, that absolutely would ban you for cursing or taking the Lord’s name in vain.
I saw this in … shit, Battlefield 1942/Vietnam/2, Garry’s Mod before it was even sold for money, various source games and mods… Red Orchestra… all kinds of games that had dedicated servers back in the early 00s, there would usually be a couple that were explicitly Christian and would ban you for swearing.
- Comment on why does almost nobody live here? 3 days ago:
2024 Presidential Race
WA by county:
WA by congr. district:
WA by precinct:
OR by county:
OR by congr. district:
OR by precinct:
Generally speaking, there is very little percentage of either state’s population living directly on or near the actual ocean facing Pacific coast… WA is basically the Seattle metro area, OR is basically the Portland metro area.
- Comment on Borger for scale 3 days ago:
Yeah, this aggresively does not make sense.
- Comment on Borger for scale 3 days ago:
There are a ton of eggs that have been broken by way of playing New Vegas.
- Comment on It seems that Valve is working on a "SteamGPT" feature that will apparently deal with Steam support issues and is somehow connected to Trust Score and CS2 anti-cheat 4 days ago:
I can still hardly believe that the tech industry at large just decided to broadly roll out LLM integration into essentially every element of their businesses, having just no idea what they actually do.
Like 2 years ago now, I was figuratively pulling my hair out, reading the discussion panel schedule for Microsoft led conferences on LLMs and cybersecurity.
Literally every topic was a different kind of way that smashing an LLM into a complex business system… increases potential failure points, broadens attack surfaces… because networked LLMs literally are security vulnerabilities.
Not a single topic about how to use LLMs defensively, how to use they to turbocharge malware recognition, nothing like that.
All just a bunch of ‘make sure you don’t do this!’ warnings, and then everyone did them anyway.
- Comment on It seems that Valve is working on a "SteamGPT" feature that will apparently deal with Steam support issues and is somehow connected to Trust Score and CS2 anti-cheat 4 days ago:
Well you got me there
github.com/SteamTracking/…/ProtobufsWebui
There’s the directory with the file in the screenshots, service_steamgpt.proto, updated 4 days ago along with a number of others.
I am uncertain if this … basically scraping operation is tracking the main Steam client or the Beta or what.
There is not a very helpful description of what exactly is being pulled here, in the readme/project descriptiom.
- Comment on It seems that Valve is working on a "SteamGPT" feature that will apparently deal with Steam support issues and is somehow connected to Trust Score and CS2 anti-cheat 4 days ago:
This is not meant to be a chatbot.
It is meant to evaluate gaming sessions of CS2.
Its an experimental, prototype of improving VAC’s serverside, backend analysis capabilities, to better detect cheaters and hackers.
You don’t need kernel level level access into everyone’s pcs.
You can run analytics on what the server records as happening in the game session, to detect odd patterns and things that should be impossible.
LLMs are … the entire thing that they do is handle massive inputs of data, and then evaluate that data.
The part of an LLM that generates a response, in text form, to that data, is a whole other thing.
They can also output… code, or spreadsheets, or images, or 3d models, or… any other kind of data.
Like say, a printout of suspicious activity in a game session, with statistically derived confidence intervals and timestamps and analysis.
- Comment on It seems that Valve is working on a "SteamGPT" feature that will apparently deal with Steam support issues and is somehow connected to Trust Score and CS2 anti-cheat 4 days ago:
The file and class or function name or w/e literally has .proto in it.
As in prototype.
- Comment on It seems that Valve is working on a "SteamGPT" feature that will apparently deal with Steam support issues and is somehow connected to Trust Score and CS2 anti-cheat 4 days ago:
Valve’s customer service responses have always been mostly a canned series of bot messages.
Their in-house support has always been 99% automated.
Its very obvious if you’ve ever interacted with them at more than an occasional, superficial level.
You have to be quite persistent to get a message from an actual human being.
Yep, the automated messages often have the name of ostensibly a human attached to them.
So do all kinds of other bots, since way before ChatGPT and LLMs took off.
What, did you a think a human person actually read every single complaint report of a hacker or cheater in a video game with an anti cheat?
No! You have bots, analytic systems screen that shit, just the same as all our resumes on Indeed have been being analysed and evaluated by bots, again, since way before LLMs got as prevalent as they are today.
Then you filter. Humans only see the odd ones that defy categorization, basically.
This has been a tech industry standard for almost two decades.
Valve is just now overhauling that system to use an LLM, because those are actually better than a very complex series of chained regex searches.
The alternative would be to do what Meta or Google or Amazon do: Hire armies of tens to hundreds of thousands of offshore contractors and give them all PTSD for pitiful wages, manually evaluating everything.
Apparently this is not widely known, by people who’ve never worked in an entreprise level tech company?
