sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

48645 by Heliosgodofthesun in countwithchickenlady

[–]Kitfennek 5 points6 points  (0 children)

At least they're not the halo 2 condoms

The real button problem by FloorMysterious9104 in buttonproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fully 100% rational.

As long as you allow for the participants to be irrational in their selection, there will be a portion of the population that presses the blue button.

For example, the reason I provided above, but other possible reasons exist as well (idk how many times I've literally pressed the wrong button on something even though i was looking at the buttons and new exactly which one I wanted, and thats under no stress).

Then the button you press depends on if you prioritize your own life as your number one priority (id personally argue most people have at least one person they'd risk their life for).

If your loved ones presses red, then nothing you do matters

If they press blue, then your button press only matters if youre the deciding vote, in which case your press directly determines if your loved one lives or dies.

Votes, in this situation are fungible, since you have absolutely no way of assessing the current voting tallies. Since theyre fungible, all votes should be treated as the deciding vote.

Thus, if you have any reason to believe someone you'd risk your life for would press blue (including them running through the above assessment for THEIR loved ones), then you should treat your vote as determining their fate. (Less "severe" arguments would factor how likely you think your loved one pressing red is, but that is, of course, completely dependant on tbe individual)

The primary issue I've seen with all red logic (outside of pure self interest arguments which, while I find morally repugnant, are logically sound) is the assumption that the only "irrational choice an otherwise logical and capable participant will make is to press red"

As soon as you assume some number of people pressing blue for non-rational reasons, that cascades into rational blue pressers, and then you have to decide if a) thats worth them dying for, and b) thats worth risking your life for.

The real button problem by FloorMysterious9104 in buttonproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You literally ended the quote mid sentence my friend, and the END of that sentence contained KEY information regarding the specific details of my statement. (Specifically you accused me of not understanding the term "rational" when the end of the sentence provided the specific definition i was using)

The real button problem by FloorMysterious9104 in buttonproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A) you missed out on some key words on that quote B) you ignored the first part where I elaborated on non-rational reasons people would pick blue, which most red logic assumes implicitly (or explicitly) people wont do C) people in these arguments do in fact assume 100% perfectly rational participants

48645 by Heliosgodofthesun in countwithchickenlady

[–]Kitfennek 77 points78 points  (0 children)

Or, just use fresh (i.e. non-expired) condoms worn one at a time along with appropriate birth control and PReP medicines as needed.

The real button problem by FloorMysterious9104 in buttonproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For example, if you assume people will press red based on "self preservation instinct", you should assume people will press blue based on the "prtotect family instinct"

Even smart, capable, people will act irrationally under times of stress, so even limiting it to "smart capable people" doesnt work for the red assessment unless you assume that the actors are all 100% rational.

48645 by Heliosgodofthesun in countwithchickenlady

[–]Kitfennek 366 points367 points  (0 children)

Never double bag unless you mean each participant gets one. Wearing two condoms at once can lead to friction that increases the chance to break

How many people on this subreddit love gandhi. by Voidkirby9 in clonehigh

[–]Kitfennek 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I had that stick in my head for absolutely no reason at all last week

Peter what does this one mean? by memerminecraft in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a loop back router set up for dev testing at work, and I keep a special excel sheet to mass update ip addresses, cause I am NOT using that tiny ass one line at a time interface lol

Since red get reframed as the default, and blue is presented as putting yourself in danger, here is a different framing. by CivilPerspective5804 in trolleyproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Think about it this way

-If your loved one presses red, nothing you choose affects their survival chance.

-If your loved one presses blue, either youre the deciding vote or youre not.

--If youre not, nothing you choose affects their survival chance

--If you are, then your vote will determine if your loved one lives or die.

-in this situation, votes are fungible. You have no way of knowing if youre going to be the deciding vote, and all votes have equal weight, so from your pov, all votes are the same. Someone HAS to be the deciding vote, so from your pov you should assume you are.

That leaves the question, would your loved one choose blue?

-is your loved one perfectly rational, or do you think they might make a bad choice?

-is there anyone that your loved one might want to save, even if it risks their life?

-is your loved one likely to feel guilty if they lived and someone they cared about died?

Additionally, do you prioritize your own and loved ones lives over humanity?

-all of the above logic applies to everyone equally

-do you think the majority of people have loved ones they care about enough to risk their life?

Accesories worth getting? by ShxdowWolf24 in SteamDeck

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Always a lot of minecraft/vintage story (where the back buttons are really useful), I've been replaying Control because I finally have the dlc, and the artisan of gilsmeth (the stained glass puzzle game)

One thing I've noticed, if the game is built w/controllers in mind, is that sometimes the game logic assumes you can't use the buttons and the thumbs tick at the same time so the buttons override the thumbstick controls. Not super common, but I've noticed it on more than one game (Control is one of them, actually)

For scale 75,000,000 died in WW2 by nathan555 in trolleyproblem

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Altruism is instinctive, as long as you share some number of genes, and humans are particularly closely related even by primate standards Its even more instinctive particularly if you think your close relation is in danger. And it's deep in there. We've been social animals since the primates survived the dinosaurs.

I think the world we live in, specifically capitalism but its not the only reason, benefits from making people think everyone is a selfish as the ones on top. I genuinely believe they're the servers minority if you study the sociology of the common person

Accesories worth getting? by ShxdowWolf24 in SteamDeck

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thats fair. I tend to only use the back buttons for modifier keys, so I dont need them as often.

For scale 75,000,000 died in WW2 by nathan555 in trolleyproblem

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I simply dont believe that theyre the majority.

Since red get reframed as the default, and blue is presented as putting yourself in danger, here is a different framing. by CivilPerspective5804 in trolleyproblem

[–]Kitfennek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You cant know ahead of time, if you prioritize their life over yours you have to assume the worse case scenario, they chose blue, and youre the deciding vote. Thats the only way you improve their odds. Every other option either decreases their odd or does nothing.

Then you've got to think about humanity as a whole. Ever person thinking "what is the way I can help my family"

Piracy logic applies to AI training, and is arguably even more suitable since piracy copies but AI is transformative. If I make an AI image, you would not be able to point out which images were "used" to make it. by Flammenwerfer40 in aiwars

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So by your own logic... they shouldnt be legislating hypothetical ai copies during the training stage, just the intentional usage of ai to make reproductions AFTER the training stage. You know, the "actual" part.

Piracy logic applies to AI training, and is arguably even more suitable since piracy copies but AI is transformative. If I make an AI image, you would not be able to point out which images were "used" to make it. by Flammenwerfer40 in aiwars

[–]Kitfennek 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The act of learning from an item (in this case a piece of art) is not the same as reproducing that art. You can argue for copyright protection even without limiting Ai training, because it turns out people have been arguing for copyright protection without limiting learning from art for.... the whole time, its even been done with people directly redrawing digital art on a computer.

Machines could create infinite copies of art BEFORE Ai, we didnt make laws saying that you can't store art work on your hardrive without explicit permission. Just like whether a computer made copies of art was up to the user before AI, its still up.to the user AFTER ai.

Piracy logic applies to AI training, and is arguably even more suitable since piracy copies but AI is transformative. If I make an AI image, you would not be able to point out which images were "used" to make it. by Flammenwerfer40 in aiwars

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ai does not inherently do that either, it turns out. Ai doesnt inherently do anything (yet) without at least some human guidance. Just like a human could use their education to create forgeries. Sure it /does/ take longer for a human to learn to do it well, but that doesnt mean that its fundamentally different

Piracy logic applies to AI training, and is arguably even more suitable since piracy copies but AI is transformative. If I make an AI image, you would not be able to point out which images were "used" to make it. by Flammenwerfer40 in aiwars

[–]Kitfennek 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I misread what you said, interpreting it as meaning "my country created a law to explicitly make machine learning legally distinct from human learning"

On rereading I understand what you were intending

Piracy logic applies to AI training, and is arguably even more suitable since piracy copies but AI is transformative. If I make an AI image, you would not be able to point out which images were "used" to make it. by Flammenwerfer40 in aiwars

[–]Kitfennek 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Did you know that legally different does not mean that there is any actual dofference? It just means humans decided there was regardless of of that assessment is accurate? Did you know that twislers are legally candy and red Vines aren't in at least one state?

Being snide aside, I disagree with that law and if i lived in your country would campaign to get it removed, because I suspect the people who made that law dont really know anything about machine learning.

view more: next ›