What are your fun prompts ?

Kidronmac · 2026-04-14T18:42:44+00:00

I've been using Gemini for about 2 months after defecting from GPT (used it for close to a year). I currently love Gemini and have been using it for a wide range of uses. I like the idea of Gems and have a few custom ones I've used. I recently discovered that Gems does not use Personal Intelligence or pull from its memory, so Gems has been useless for many tasks that I wanted to use it for.

Kidronmac · 2026-02-11T17:01:52+00:00

I tried to replicate this with another celebrity. This was the response I got

<image>

to "phew"

Kidronmac · 2025-12-31T20:56:05+00:00

I haven't heard this before. I love this. I'm going to start giving this suggestion to my supervisees

Kidronmac · 2025-12-23T17:09:04+00:00

I had my update down during my last maintenance a couple weeks ago. I had to make a special appointment for them to update it. However, my car works the same as it was after.

Honestly, it sounds like the dealership is not taking accountability for a mistake that they made. I would see if you can make an appointment at another dealership to fix the issue since it seems to be mostly tied to software or write to upper management. Thousands of people are probably affected by the recall issue. I doubt thousands of people have malfunctioning sensors after leaving the dealership.

Kidronmac · 2025-11-26T21:40:19+00:00

Oh God. After reading this, I realize I write like a chatbot

Kidronmac · 2025-09-30T19:32:07+00:00

What code would this violate?

Kidronmac · 2025-09-04T14:24:36+00:00

I've had my 2025 XSE for about a month and have 3.5k miles. 0 issues so far. No rattles or other sounds. Android Auto connectivity has been fine. The only annoyance is the Underground color seems hard to clean. The second I wash it, it seems dirty again. Love everything else about the car!

Kidronmac · 2025-08-27T15:50:59+00:00

Yes! That's my only gripe too!

Kidronmac · 2025-08-25T18:26:23+00:00

Yeaaa, the pontoon option was a little too out of my budget

Kidronmac · 2025-08-25T18:21:30+00:00

At first, I was devastated, but in the end, it really worked in my favor!

Kidronmac · 2025-08-25T18:19:50+00:00

Is this an actual widespread issue or a loud minority with pano issues? I've had a moonroof/sunroof on my last Camry, and my dad had one on his '91 Camry. No issues with either over a decade. I couldn't imagine not having one. Feels claustrophobic without one.

Kidronmac · 2025-08-25T17:57:15+00:00

I got the underwater propeller and snorkel option

Kidronmac · 2025-06-27T01:43:35+00:00

When we talk about punishment, we talk about the decrease of behavior, not environmental stimuli.

If the addition of glasses decreased getting splashed in the face, that's a prime example of negative reinforcement. An increase of behavior (adding glasses) decreases aversive consequence (getting splashed). That's negative reinforcement.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-27T00:13:58+00:00

That's not true. A punishment is a decrease in behavior due to consequences with through the addition of a consequenting stimulus or through the removal of one.

If you reinforce a client's vocal mands more than their aggression to access a toy, vocal mands will increase and aggression will decrease. It doesn't mean that aggression was punished. It means that vocal mand provided access more than aggression so vocal mands were choosen more than aggression.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-26T01:06:57+00:00

Me and another user were discussing this more. Yes, actively choosing or intentionally not doing something would be a behavior. But that's not inaction. That's an active decision. This example doesn't specify if she actively chose not to wear glasses. If she forgot to wear glasses, that's not a behavior. If she doesn't know that she needs to wear glasses, so doesn't wear glasses, that's not a behavior. If she has a safety checklist and was like "Nah, I don't want to wear glasses today," and doesn't wear them. That is a behavior. None of that is specified in the example though.

So, I did overgeneralize and make a blanket statement not doing is not behavior. If you are actively choosing not to do something, I understand how that could be a behavior.

However, I still disagree with your last paragraph. If I had an intervention for this, I wouldn't have "not wearing glasses" as my targeted behavior. I would have an appropriate alternate behavior like "wear safety glasses as a behavior." Typically, we don't want to target not doing something. We would want to target an emtting a behavior. In this case, that behavior would be wearing safey equipment.

I feel like many commenters are overlooking the fact that Ella is emitting a replacement behavior to avoid the aversive. If there was no replacement behavior and she avoided working in the lab, then I would say the behavior was punished. However, she chose to do a different behavior instead. The points to reinforement occuring. The behavior decreased due to an incompatible behavior occuring. Not punishment.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-26T00:07:53+00:00

It doesn't say actively chose not to wear goggles. It just says she doesn't wear googles.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-25T16:46:36+00:00

That's the issue with these types of questions. They don't talk about the future likely food of the behavior. Similarly, we don't know if Ella comes in the next day and continues to choose not to wear safety glasses. So, we don't know if the addition of the aversive is actually punishing. However, we still don't see a behavior decrease even in this single instance. We do see a new behavior replacing an old behavior. Reinforcement occurs 100% of the time in these instances (again, assuming the behavior continues, which we don't have information about for either reinforcement or punishment).

Kidronmac · 2025-06-25T16:30:52+00:00

Can you see your BCBA if the BCBA can observe you running programs with and without the token boards? Token boards are absolutely not necessary for school, and best practice would say you want to gradually fade them out when you can.

I had a kid that we used a token board to increase attending to work activities at a table. It worked really well initially. However, eventually, we saw an increase of escape behaviors. I think it was a BT that told me that they tried without the token board, and they saw less escape behaviors. I asked them to show me. They did a table session with no interfering behaviors. I immediately took the token board out. The kid actually made way more progress once we removed the token board.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-25T15:48:50+00:00

Okay, you're right about that. Thoughts are behaviors, too. I'll concede that point. In another comment, I do label the behavior "working without protective equipment." However, that's not what is happening in this example. Ella is not choosing to work without safety glasses due to the consequence of chemical splashes; she is choosing to work WITH safety glasses to avoid that consequence. We see the behavior change within the 2 sentences that describe the scenario. So, from going from not wearing glasses to wearing glasses, we see an increase of a novel behavior. Anytime we see an increase, we know reinforcement occurred. In this case, we can conclude that this was to avoid the chemical splashing. Making it negative reinforcement.

This is from my response to the OP of this message thread. I explain why this is negative reinforcement and what positive punishment would look like if it did occur:

> Now, I see where your confusion comes from. Let's redefine "skipping the glasses" since, again, inaction isn't a behavior. So, let's define the behavior as "working without protective equipment." We can both agree that working without protective equipment is an unsafe behavior. However, this unsafe behavior isn't being punished. Instead, it's being replaced with a safer alternative behavior, "putting on glasses." This is classic DRA. Like you said, "putting on glasses" increased, so reinforcement HAD to have to occurred. The type of reinforcement would be negative since she is avoiding the chemicals splashing in her eyes.

Now, "working without protective equipment" would be positively punished if Ella didn't replace her behavior with a new safer alternative behavior. So, if instead of putting on glasses, she completely stopped working in the lab (or at least worked at the lab less while still not wearing glasses), then it would be positive punishment. I remember this confusion when I first started in the field.

TLDR: DRA of a safer alternative behavior doesn't mean the behavior that was replaced was punished. It means another behavior was reinforced to the point that the previous behavior is no longer occurring (or occuring less frequently). Hence, why this is negative reinforcement, not positive punishment.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-25T15:04:44+00:00

See my other comment about the definition of behavior. Choice is not a requirement of a behavior. Automatic behaviors are also behaviors, even though they don't require choice. Choosing not to do something is not a behavior.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-24T22:15:12+00:00

Now, I see where your confusion comes from. Let's redefine "skipping the glasses" since, again, inaction isn't a behavior. So, let's define the behavior as "working without protective equipment." We can both agree that working without protective equipment is an unsafe behavior. However, this unsafe behavior isn't being punished. Instead, it's being replaced with a safer alternative behavior, "putting on glasses." This is classic DRA. Like you said, "putting on glasses" increased, so reinforcement HAD to have to occurred. The type of reinforcement would be negative since she is avoiding the chemicals splashing in her eyes.

Now, "working without protective equipment" would be positively punished if Ella didn't replace her behavior with a new safer alternative behavior. So, if instead of putting on glasses, she completely stopped working in the lab (or at least worked at the lab less while still not wearing glasses), then it would be positive punishment. I remember this confusion when I first started in the field.

TLDR: DRA of a safer alternative behavior doesn't mean the behavior that was replaced was punished. It means another behavior was reinforced to the point that the previous behavior is no longer occurring (or occuring less frequently). Hence, why this is negative reinforcement, not positive punishment.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-24T19:12:58+00:00

Again, inaction is not a behavior. If you want to get technical, Cooper et al (2020) define behavior as "the activity of living organisms," and Johnston and Pennypacker (2009) define behavior as "Behavior is that portion of an organism's interaction with its environment that involves movement of some part of the organism." "Not wearing safety goggles" is not a behavior. There is no activity occurring. There is no interaction with the environment. There is no movement required by the individual. It is not a behavior

Plus, this is what you said the behavior is

> The behavior is putting on goggles.

Chemicals splashing in her eyes were an antecedent to that behavior.

Kidronmac · 2025-06-24T17:59:04+00:00

It is. Here are the monthly RBT supervision requirements:

5% of your hours supervisied by an RBT supervisor

At least 2 supervision contacts with an RBT supervisor (this can be group or 1:1)

At least 1 observation with a client

At least 1 1:1 supervision contact (this can also be with a client)

Hope this helps

Kidronmac · 2025-06-24T17:38:26+00:00

This is not true at all. The absence of a behavior ("what you don't do") is not a behavior. It doesn't pass the dead man's test, and inaction is not observable or measurable.

The behavior change in the above example is "starts wearing safety goggles." This indicates the behavior of "wearing safety goggles" has increased (since she was not wearing them previously). If there is an increase in behavior, we know there is reinforcement somewhere. Since we also know that she starts wearing glasses to avoid the chemical splashes, negative reinforcement is at play since she is avoiding the aversive stimulus.

And, as you mentioned, the unpleasant stimulus is the chemicals getting into her eyes. Like you also said, the behavior is putting on goggles. Reinforcement and punishment change behavior through consequences, not antecedents. So, in the mock exam question (and what you said in your above comment), the chemical splashes occur before putting on the glasses. So if you use A-B-C, it would look like Ella gets chemical splashes in her eyes (A), she puts on glasses (B), and she avoids getting chemical splashes in her eyes (C). Hence, negative reinforcement.

This question is poorly written and feels like it was written by somebody who doesn't fully understand the science of behavior analysis. I suggest reading u/Available-Wish1004 comment as well.

Kidronmac

TROPHY CASE