The amount of intelligence to suggest there will be an attack on specific places at specific times is contextual and not comparably equal.

Every time I hear or read that expression, I stop taking the comment seriously because it attempts to shut down dialogue with a cute, esoteric phrase instead of fostering a discussion about a serious retrospective.

Not able to get into it legally or without consequence, it is not infallible.

I'm losing braincells relying on Google Search shoving ad riddled trash in my face and even worse AI results. Gemini frequently just straight up lies to me. Saying the opposite of the truth so frequently I have experienced negative consequences in real life believing it.

The only people who are being homogenized or "down-graded" by Chat GPT are people who wouldn't have sought other sophisticated strategies in the first place, and those who understand that Chat GPT is a tool and understand how it works, and it's context, can utilize it efficiently with great positive effect.

Obviously Chat GPT is not perfect but it doesn't need to be perfect to be useful. For a search user, Google Search has not been effective for so long it's unbelievable people still use it. That is, if you believe search should be a helpful tool with utility and not a product made to generate maximum revenue at the cost of search experience.

Would you say that people were losing braincells using google in 2010 to look up an animal fact instead of going to a library and opening an encyclopedia?

> Gemini frequently just straight up lies to me

I'm pretty sure they meant LLMs in general, not just ChatGPT. They all straight up lie to very similar degrees, no contest there.

> The only people who are being homogenized or "down-graded" by Chat GPT are people who wouldn't have sought other sophisticated strategies in the first place, and those who understand that Chat GPT is a tool and understand how it works, and it's context, can utilize it efficiently with great positive effect.

I know for a fact that this isn't true. I have a friend who was really smart, probably used to have an IQ of 120 and he would agree with all of this. But a few of us are noticing that he's essentially being lobotomized by LLMs and we've been trying to warn him but he just doesn't see it, he's under the impression that "he's using LLMs efficiently with great positive effect".

In reality his intellectual capabilities (which I used to really respect) have withered and he gets strangely argumentative about really basic concepts that he's absolutely wrong about. It seems like he won't accept it as true until an LLM says so. We used to laugh at those people together because this could never happen to us, so don't think that it can never happen to you.

Word of advice for anyone reading this: If multiple people in your life suddenly start warning you that your LLM interactions seem to be becoming a problem for one reason or another, make the best possible effort to hear them out and take them seriously. I know it probably sounds absurd from your point of view, but that's simply a flaw in our own perception of ourselves, we don't see ourselves objectively, we don't realize when we've changed.

I didn't say it was common, I said it's possible because I've seen it with my own eyes. He's over 30, I've known him for over 15 years and we've occasionally collaborated on software projects.

I have a really good idea of his "abilities" and we've been in contact regularly all these years which is why I can pinpoint when this all started. I even talked to a few of our common friends about it because I'm worried about his well-being and they agreed that there's been a pretty dramatic shift in his abilities and demeanour.

> using IQ to qualify someone's intelligence is a signal

You're way off base. Believe me I know that IQ as such isn't a great way of measuring and especially comparing intelligence between cultures, but I was comparing him against himself.

In other words, he used to be really smart and had above-average critical thinking skills. Now he's seemingly incapable of critically engaging with new technical ideas or reason about their implications. He just refuses to engage with anything that is mentally demanding.

> I'm not trying to be rude [...] and I'm old enough

You should probably put more effort into the "trying not to" part. Your entire response is "straight up" a rude dismissal accusing me of being a "juvenile" "TikTok" liar at every step, "lol".

Same in Korea, just on the other side of the road, very polite and professional, no one breaks rules for the most part, even in Major Cities.

I know a lot of foreigners like Japan for motorcycling specifically because you can "white line" in most places, and the drivers are attentive.

The one quirk I thought was most interesting was Crab Angle Stops or when at a T shape stop lights that have an additional stop light 20 feet further from the intersection. Sometimes the cars will align diagonally to allow more traffic per light and let whoever is in front have a better angle to see traffic on small roads with poor visibility. Then when the light turns green the diagonally aligned cars move back to normal.

Like ////// to - - - - - -

Officially, the 道路交通法 (Road Traffic Act) doesn’t say “you must angle.” It just requires drivers to stop at the line and confirm safety before entering.

The diagonal stop is more of a local driving custom (practical adaptation) rather than a codified rule.

Nah I did Ayahuasca and I'm an empathetic person who most would consider normal or at least well-adjusted. If it's drug related it would most definitely be something else.

I’m inclined to believe your upbringing plays a much larger role.

From people who would harm them?

Oh you're that anti-games, anti-porn guy, best to ignore anything you say.

I'm not anti-games.

>From people who would harm them?

Like who? I really hope you don't mean the kids' parents.

Problem is, parents are literally the most likely people to do that

No, seriously, look up stats on who gets charged with hurting children and you'll see that it's mostly parents. Sure, once in a while there's a pedophile handing out candy from a van, but almost all of the time it's a parent or some other person trusted by the parents to watch the kid.

this is coming across as intentionally obtuse questioning. Many people, including governments think that adopting specific sexual preferences and identities is wrong and worthy of criminal charges and harassment at a minimum.

If I use the scroll bar or touchpad it's not too bad, but using a scroll wheel is causing me immense pain.

The design otherwise looks great, I just cannot be arsed to follow the flow they're forcing.

Well they probably consider many people's music taste basic because a lot of music consumers aren't actually "in to" music. They just want pop with catchy cycles, memorable lyrics, and na na na's. Anything that falls outside of that is too much exploration for them.

Most of these playlists are uninspired, but I never took CEO's to be big music heads anyway. Most CEO's are into basic entertainment because they deprioritize exploring it.

A lot of people use it for cooking and other categories as well.

Techies are also great for network growth and verification for other users, and act as community managers indirectly.

Wisdom tends to resemble shallow aphorisms despite being framed as universal. Rather than interrogating wisdom's relevance or depth, many people simply repeat it uncritically as a shortcut to insight. This reflects more about how people use wisdom than the content itself, but I believe that behavior contributes to our perception of the importance of wisdom.

It frequently reduces complex problems into comfortable oversimplifications.

Maybe you don't think that is real wisdom, and maybe that's sort of your point, but then what does real wisdom look like? Should wisdom make you considerate of the multiple contexts it does and doesn't affect? Maybe the issue is we need to better understand how to evaluate and use wisdom. People who truly understand a piece of wisdom should communicate deeply rather than parroting platitudes.

Also to be frank, wisdom is a way of controlling how others perceive a problem, and is a great way to manipulate others by propping up ultimatums or forcing scope. Much of past wisdom is unhelpful or highly irrelevant to modern life.

e.g. "Good things come to those who wait."

Passive waiting rarely produces results. Initiative, timing, and strategic action tend to matter more than patience.

I have enjoyed learning the context and original meaning behind many of these aphorisms and words of wisdom, and that is the true utility of learning them, so that you can subvert them and invert them. Cultural touchstones have value because of shared context. The specific utility and applicability of wisdom varies because conversation is context specific and outcome dependent based on the adversarial vs collaborative nature of the dialogue.

Rarely is it collaborative and the onus is on the learner to understand the benefit with no context into the importance or relevance of the information. My point is that the value is lost frequently because of human behavior.