When I do bcc to a big list, I describe the distribution in the email header. Like “To: all users of the xxx application” or “To: All Engineering employees at the yyy site.”

I agree that, asking with the bad things OP mentions, there are good things about a smaller site. I remember a lot of times on Reddit when I had something to say, but when I went into the thread there were thousands of comments and I’d feel like there just wasn’t a point in adding mine.

On Lemmy, when I make a comment, it’s very likely to be seen (for better or worse), and I have much more of a feeling of adding to the conversation. It’s more like joining a conversation at a party.

There’s a huge contingent, even here, who loves both those guys, but maybe more importantly, they’re supposed to be on our side. Hell, Trump is the president! Putin is the dictatorial ruler of an enemy country, we expect that he’s going to do and say stuff that’s terrible.

That’s only after the electoral college votes.

Isn’t this one of the LLMs that was partially trained on Reddit data? LLMs are inherently a model of a conversation or question/response based on their training data. That response looks very much like what I saw regularly on Reddit when I was there. This seems unsurprising.

Any Warcraft 3 players read the headline and automatically respond with “I’m not ready!”

Heh, understandable. I’m one of the older Lemmy folks, I’d guess. I’m a software engineering manager for an aerospace company.

My wife and I moved into our first house together on Halloween, 1995, so that night we drank a bottle of champagne, watched Young Frankenstein, and handed out candy. Every year since then we’ve done the same thing to celebrate our anniversary of living together, though sometime a different movie. This year, we couldn’t find our DVD, so decided to stream it and found what you did. Apparently Disney bought it and for some reason decided not to make it available. Very frustrating.

Newsweek is a terrible, terrible publication.

See this reply

See this reply

Grouped tightly enough, this combination of red and green wavelengths will provide a perception of the color we call “brown”

If you defined “brown,” you’d have to do it that way - by describing the wavelengths that we perceived as that color. The fact that your phone screen - a technology that works by emitting light - can display brown means there’s light that we call “brown.” It may happen that is really a dark orange, in much the same way that pink is a light red, but so what? It’s light and we see it as brown. Brown light.

Knowing the motivations of a media company is never irrelevant.

Riddle me this: if there’s no such thing as brown light, how do you see the color brown on your phone screen?

Not sure why you say that. With the right filter, you can project a light of any color. What makes you think brown is special?

To get that kind of accuracy from a student project with such a small sample set is pretty remarkable and pretty frightening. Yes, there are people who are good at this, but (1) this AI just beat one of the most skilled humans and (2) having it in an AI brings the capability to anyone, regardless of their motives.

Plus, with an AI you can incorporate more heuristics than any human could reasonably master. The article mentions types of foliage, which is a good example. An AI could incorporate thousands of things like that easily. Seems like a tool that’s ripe for abuse, but I don’t know what you could do about it.

That’s exactly my thoughts. Throughout the whole Trump candidacy and presidency, I’ve generally avoided criticism about what he looks like or the inconsequential things he does. If he were a decent president, or even a decent human being, it wouldn’t matter about his orange skin, weird hair, strange posture, weird smell, fast food diet, or any of that kind of thing. It’s the fact that he tried to overthrow the government, likely gave away or sold national secrets, raped women, installed cabinet members who intended to dismantle the organizations they were in charge of, etc. etc.

But ironically, he and his base are totally fine with those things, it’s the inconsequential and superficial stuff that might actually cost him votes.

You didn’t say nearest to what…

It makes it harder for him to win the primary, though he’s pretty far ahead

That’s big news. Will be interesting to see what the supreme court says.