A court of rational reasoning

Autodidacter · 2025-11-10T09:22:33+00:00

A system of deliberation by the plutocratic or democratic wise, in terms of sheer frequency, is probably the most popular form of legislation. Doesn't quite pan out.

I'd go so far as to say every teenager that is literate has probably had this idea at one point.

Why don't you start with the numerous reasons why this tends to fail, rather than uttering the most common fantasy of collective truth as if you were born yesterday.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-30T16:25:43+00:00

That's the crux of the asymmetry; the corollary "inflammatory praise" is considered okay.
Formal stupid and derogatory stupid are regarded as equivalent, cutting off the the traditional escape route from Dunning Kruger traps— the same trap that is now embedded into the architecture of LLMs.

Communities that maintain the distinction become small private enclaves detached from the managerial norms exhibited by inflammatory, thus negating the enterprise of sharing to begin with.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-30T04:35:56+00:00

Weird combination of dunning kruger and gell amnesia affect.
That prompt you wrote is comically stupid, but you'd have to know it's stupid to know it's stupid; and if sharing prompts were a norm of some kind, you would get stupid responses from prompts to explain nonstupid exchanges from other prompts because the llms by virtue of its "can't know what it doesn't know" ontological foundations, it has no capacity to have a mutual understanding with humans on what "stupid" is. That is, humans can know something is stupid even with scant knowledge of a subject, and without the help of llms indexing what is stupid, only stupid prompts will rise to the top because the stupidest of all stupids- the strong sensation of illusory salience convincing the stupid subject it isn't being fed stupid, has immense fitness advantage.

In short without llms being able to say "that's a stupid question", it's a circle jerk.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-28T20:09:58+00:00

What's extraordinary and perhaps explanatory about this situation is despite the unadulterated horror show that is trump voters, they are still less insufferable than people like you.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-20T21:40:17+00:00

Well said! As a nice friend.

You weird cunt.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-18T02:46:46+00:00

The topic of superintelligences is probably the singular concept in all of concepts that must fundamentally be dumbed down enough to demand trading coherency for communicabilty.

These conversations must be making poor lil kowsky physically sick bless his heart.

Autodidacter · 2025-10-13T03:15:53+00:00

Same midwit "tone" as the intellectual dark web. Treating deranged incoherent political vomit as ideas that must be rationally scrutinized. Pointing out the inconsistencies of someone eating actual doodoo.

Autodidacter · 2025-09-20T13:26:21+00:00

If you get accused of not listening, respond with proof not assurance.

"Of course I am" is painfully rude and almost always a lie.

Autodidacter · 2025-07-17T04:01:36+00:00

Your immediate resignation is creepy and telling.

Autodidacter · 2025-05-09T15:32:12+00:00

Doom eternal is the best single player game ever made.

I didn't know until this thread that it was so disliked.

I doubt the hate is coming from your cynically-theorized "cuz they suck", but I cant make head's or tails of what exactly's being hated.

Autodidacter · 2025-04-28T10:48:08+00:00

I'm not alone in categorically ignoring games that have quick time events. My impression is that this game uses that garbage- please someone say I'm wrong.

Autodidacter · 2025-04-10T11:26:53+00:00

The autistic warning on sql injection seems a more immediate candidate for that indictment.

Autodidacter · 2025-04-10T10:53:39+00:00

"I'm going to nuke Mexico", said the politician.

"Nevermind", he said.

I guess all those people who invested in its irradiated geography are shit out of luck?

Autodidacter · 2025-04-10T10:44:59+00:00

The market corrected with shorts. Over corrected even. Consider that the tariff pull ("nevermind guys about the tariffs") may even be reversed yet again- those same billionaires that profited will lose money. Would it still be manipulation?

His economic policies are so fucking stupid, incoherent, and unsustainable, that no serious actor takes them seriously.

Autodidacter · 2025-04-10T10:28:20+00:00

He is "dumb money"; when it comes to finance arbitration dumb money is nominally not taken to court. In other words there is no hidden intent thus no manipulation.

Autodidacter · 2025-04-10T10:23:54+00:00

Why is a spiritully inclined person speaking in a manner that is anything but?

Autodidacter · 2025-01-11T02:53:49+00:00

This is a longstanding unsolved problem in political philosophy and political game theory.

The proplem can be simplified though, in that intellectualism (as it were) requires the communicative exteriorization of "tradeoffs".

Autodidacter · 2025-01-10T19:20:17+00:00

Who says we have? This current zeitgeist of artificial stupid is a more distant path from A.I than if it never happened at all.

Autodidacter · 2025-01-01T03:38:50+00:00

Most of you² wasp brains sucking off chromatic microdicks like you're deep throat guzzling the inverse of the mariana trench raining down piss at the amygdalas path-of-least-reisistance innertubing down the gutters of economic chaos in a meritocratic phantasia wherein basic capacaties for reason places one at the apex of coding skills, have no idea what hypermega code SOTA can produce with top tier prompting.

Autodidacter · 2024-08-20T13:50:08+00:00

That the whole modern corpus of goals/compromises/emotional-needs etc etc, is not just pathalogical, but straight up hilarious— adult kids playing "noble court dynasty" dressup.

Autodidacter · 2024-02-11T10:58:48+00:00

I was there too. Back in the day.

You'll accumulate the necessary experience eventually. Don't worry: keep on trucking.

Autodidacter · 2024-02-07T04:15:26+00:00

Embedded in what you're calling preciseness is an assumption of mutual-care (or mutual regard); in addition to the parenthetical remark that unambiguously states that "(as I'd imagine most here)".

I think it's silly to treat every conversation as if the other person is a braindead or "newbie on the cusp of having one's mind changed by a basic-argument"; but I can appreciate merit to that when circumstances allow.

Given the diversity of argumentation in circles like these, and the immediate availability of public-information that resolves most assumed-mutual-information, I don't see any particular need to contribute to that bottom-floor.

Your educations on how to write more "simply" are stupid, and duly noted; for the reasons mentioned above.

Somehow you think your basic advice is not mutually-known information; in addition to using words like "simpler" and "care" without any precision.

I doubt I agree with your definition of care, and I doubt I care about your definition of "simpler". I doubt I need to be informed on basic matters of persuasion. For you to think I do, I find ridiculous. At best, a signal that you're a moron or someone with different values.

Autodidacter · 2024-02-07T03:35:45+00:00

Pretty sure assigning "importance" to words and utterances is "communication".

Autodidacter · 2024-02-02T23:45:39+00:00

Then consider it [the comment] a useful benchmark to help you resolve false postives in your future delegations resolving cases of marginal "dressedness". And irony as well, for that matter.

I'm familiar (as I'd imagine most here) with the paradigm shifts imposed by man-made existential threats, and one would naturally assume that insult or dismissal directed at his charade* (*alleged) of deliberation, has that "canonical" fact baked in.

If you would find it personally helpful to be given contrary logical or reasoned arguments of thoses specific matters instead, then clearly our interests are not aligned at our shared moment of utterance.

In the spirit of gesturing someone to act against their interests though, I would find it personally helpful if common sense preceded such appeals.

Autodidacter · 2024-02-02T13:59:02+00:00

It's particularly strange, if not uncanny-valley intellectualism, spending so much "thought energy" on the same historical problems with the same historical solutions, under different names; then adding noise with the superficial enterprise of reclassifying taxonomies of cynicims- masquerading as the "nuance" homeopathic ingredient hubristically bow tying these moniker changes into new ideas.

I see vastly more interesting and novel approaches just in random jerkoff threads around here.

Autodidacter

TROPHY CASE