But going beyond "going native" as a response to modern life towards in a more integrated or conscious way. Going forwards to a weird future of new behaviour rather than backwards to savagery.
10,531 karma · joined May 21, 2017
But going beyond "going native" as a response to modern life towards in a more integrated or conscious way. Going forwards to a weird future of new behaviour rather than backwards to savagery.
It's quite possible you saw something somewhere about it several days if not weeks or months previously and naturally didn't consciously register it. Advertisements are designed to work this way and the memory is a wonderful thing.
It's dangerous because it's manipulative, it removes agency from ourselves and its addictive to the marketeers. It hurts our identity to admit we are manipulated so psychologically we play along with the manipulation and deny being weakened (and they know this).
If I can sell you a book and make you think it's entirely your own choice then my marketing has been incredibly successful.
Or it may not be doing what marketeers and advertising agencies actually planned to happen and it could be just random coincidence.
As you encourage, I would also like to be a little bit charitable and say that some users might be clever at programming or know about certain technology subjects but when it comes to real life and morality they are stuck in early edgy teenager mode, so we can still work and communicate with them on other topics. I try to flag these submissions because I know that many users are completely unable to discuss them in fruitful ways. Many of us are immature.
At a societal level, the simplistic and edgy teenager morality is mostly expressed online so we being terminally online tend to notice it more. The morality might be most publicly seen in "silence is violence" which is a thought terminating cliche. Thinking is hard and changing one's mind is hard too, especially when people have these thoughts which literally stop them thinking.
Psychologically, for many, expressing these juvenile, half baked, sloppy thoughts do not require much thought. They are cheap psychologically. It's like how being in a herd is actually comfortable and saves energy. It costs brain effort and potential hurt to ones self identity to change one's brain patterns. Most people choose to avoid even the thoughts that change is possible and not only wish to remain in Platos cave but to then keep their eyes closed to the shadows on the wall.
Another charitable thought: these worrying ideas are not actually ideas but emotions. For some users they try to argue with these people with logic but they should really connect emotionally - try to help the people feel for others, the good and the moral. Easiest to do with personal first hand real stories and not abstract ideas. To break down otherness through charity.
I would say that investing oneself and one's money in an idea changes how one feels about the choices that was taken. I would say that those not invested might think that some of the arguments might have untruths more than those who have invested.
(For me inertia does play a role too! "Why fix what's not broken")
How is performance (RAM and CPU) compared to vscode?
As an aside I'd love to see Electron replacements using the Firefox engine. I wonder how possible it would be. (I know there was a cancelled official mozilla project a decade ago on the last engine but maybe its time for a re-visit)
Thoughts on Late Style by Edward Said https://www.edwardsaid.org/articles/thoughts-on-late-style/
The photographs and text within quotes are probably the only human things in there. We might go to the source of the data (the brothers instagram) for better conclusions, but for me this well is poisoned by slop.
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=A%20Day%20in%20the%20Life%20of...
I think it's built into our selves that we think this way, or it's a common fallacy or thinking error or perhaps conscious decision to state that the present is the most important time ever and so that position brings a sense of urgency and force to ones argument. We see it on every political side left, right and centre and I think it's more easily seen in environmentalism which uses it as a central point. It doesn't mean that the arguments are necessarily wrong, more like it's a (potentially manipulative) way to spur action.
Looking at history and considering the past might be an antidote to manipulation. I'm still trying to find what the term is properly, Presentism and Chronocentrism seems to be on the right track?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(historical_analysi... Chronocentrism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronocentrism
Anyhow these lectures feel to me to be ultimately based on this - to motivate change according to some desired end. To think of the end of the world happening soon, so you better get motivated.
Like the Bene Gesserit in the Dune novels, long running institutions like the Church, I believe at its best understand humanity and measure time and weigh the present on a more universal scale.
If you've gotten this far and are still puzzled, consider this thought experiment: "Today is the closest we are to nuclear Armageddon, we must do something!" Many would agree with this statement. Now, think of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 - its likely that was actually the closest we got to it, and so the statement about today is false and so the urgency to do something now is weakened. One can understand therefore that to counter this inherent bias or fallacy is not something that we generally want to do.
Maybe the stages of grief are not aligned yet. Or maybe it's as your post says there are two types of people.
I should clarify and revise my thoughts and initial comment. I do not think that not being able to detect it leads to lack of care. I actually think that many things have passed me by and in the future this will be even more as LLMs improve ("we're cooked").
As to "what do we do when we spot it" - you hit the nail on the head of the feelings I felt as I was writing the comment. What do we actually do, what can we change and should we attempt futile things?
And even the example dang gave - the actual submission as very good. Is any amount of LLM use okay and what's the level? I use LLMs at work but I don't like writing readmes or blog posts with it. But others might like writing code at work by hand and don't like writing text so use LLMs for that. Maybe I lower my expectations!
It's obviously says LLM to me at first read through.
I suspect that:
a) less people are willing to expend a bit of energy to notice LLM usage given how much of it is. ("we've lost" theory)
b) that people are losing the ability to detect LLM submissions. ("we're cooked" theory)
or c) that people don't care about the use of LLM. ("who cares" theory).
Personally I've been feeling less invested, because it seems as if most users don't care and even the main users of the site don't notice it.
For many it's not worth the effort to even try anymore. Particularly when the content of a submission is about LLMs: why worry?
HN users continue to upvote LLM written submissions.
The default for me is every LLM submission has little credibility unless proven otherwise. Enshittied.
I've picked up Hyperion from the library last week and have been enjoying it so much - reading it and Dan Simmons for the first time and wondering why I waited so long. It reads like literature, food for the brain and soul - like what good science fiction should be.
That this kind of writing puts a great number of us off is not important to many who seek their fortune in this industry.
I hear the cry: "it's my own words the LLM just assisted me". Yes we have to write prompts.
It had a little text label next to names so you could manually add whatever you want. Recently I've thought about this extension and using it to tag the LLM users, or the humans who tend to pop up to fan the flames or who regularly post thought terminating comments - little tags to remind me to ignore the bots and trolls.
I imagine the translation to lighthouses would be to ensure that your time there is spent in a good routine of keeping yourself active and to have some training on how to maintain psychological health. Over wintering Antarctic research scientists and astronauts probably also have rigorous routines although they would be in a small community which can regulate mental health.
I'm also reminded of the requirements of people being asked to move to small communities on isolated harsh islands. One would imagine that they would be attractive to people who do well alone, introverts, who work alone and are happy quietly, but they actually want and favour people who like others, need to work with others, who work well in a community and are socially outgoing.
(the US was founded by religious exiles from a state which didn't stay out)
Religions are explicitly political but politics shouldn't interfere with religions. To follow your religion means interacting with the outside world. It's not some personally private thing like a harmless badge you wear (although there are American faith communities that advocate for that).
The cases in the past where political have interfered with religions are often, ironically enough, by other religious politicians. Hence the good idea to separate church and state.
The camera both removes the person from the scene and also by recording enables the event to be captured in a format to be reviewed again. The videos are never actually intended to be watched again or shared with friends though but they are proof that the person was physically there (if not wholly present).
There was a video I recently saw about how birthday parties should be filmed. Instead of a video of just the birthday girl in front of a cake reacting to her friends singing happy birthday, she takes the camera, flips it so we don't see her anymore but we see her friends singing facing her with faces full of love.