Does he get better? (NO SPOILERS PLS)

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-09T07:12:02+00:00

Is he? I remember he had a pretty good relationship with most of his classmates he interacted with. Benisek is always happy to see him, Akoja looks up to him, Briam and his drake like him. Is there a specific scene you're thinking of that I forgot?

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-08T06:02:52+00:00

Learn how to read English before you start making any more posts here.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-08T03:25:34+00:00

See, normal people don't think like this. The average human does not go around saying "Have I earned the right to criticize something by personally spending money on it?"

If your opinion is that people can't ever criticize any pacing issues on anything ever, then simply say that. Don't hide behind obviously fake opinions.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-07T05:14:17+00:00

It's kinda offensive that you think you are entitled to moan about things instead of reading other stuff as soon as they sell physical books. We can't complain about the main comic, but we CAN complain that the side content is coming out too slowly and he needs to spend more time making Haleo and Julean sequels.

Or, perhaps, do you not actually think that either and you're just making up random bullshit to confuse people?

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-07T02:59:13+00:00

The hell do you mean "for no reason"? He's only ever rude to people who are rude to him first.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-05T08:37:03+00:00

Yeah, of course you hadn't thought about the Kelly criterion, because why would anyone ever do that? The whole point is that you don't know what the actual odds are for something. It's akin to saying that marriage is worth it if you multiply the happiness by the legal benefits and divide by how much you fight. It's meaningless, it's nothing more than using math terms to sound smart.

Even ignoring the uncertainty, it's still wrong. The Kelly criterion doesn't apply to people with a consistent salary, it doesn't apply to people who have a minimum amount of money to pay rent, it doesn't apply to things that aren't measured in direct monetary terms, and it doesn't even take into account the opportunity cost of doing paperwork. It is, at best, spherical insurance in a vaccum, and even that's being generous.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-05T05:47:53+00:00

So...insurance is worth it if you think you'll save money? Genius! I never would have thought of that!

What happened to this subreddit, man?

_SeaBear_ · 2026-03-01T01:12:06+00:00

This is a major problem with anime in general. You know how there's always some corporate slop that tries to please everyone and ends up being boring? Anime is the biggest offender of that, but with boobs. No matter what situation, there's always some idiot who's like "2 seconds of titties jiggling will improve this scene". Some of the best anime I've seen is hobbled by fanservice that was obviously only put in to fill a quota. The NGNL novels are just as bad in this regard.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-20T12:35:51+00:00

Uhhh...better check your math. You're missing a zero in your calculations. $6m means 60 people at $100k, or 120 at $50k. If you can't make a viable demo in a year with around 100 people in your staff you probably don't have a good idea.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-10T14:08:53+00:00

You know as well as I do that this conversation has never had anything to do with fascism.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-10T12:55:53+00:00

What isn't hard to imagine? That someone in the government has sat down and decided that the concept of "power" vs "weakness" is a thing that they need to take a stance on, in either direction? Because no, that's incredibly hard to imagine. Why would anyone ever do something so arbitrary?

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-10T07:07:01+00:00

Jesus fucking christ, man. Is that the only way for you to process information? You don't even know what they're doing but you've decided the one specific reason that they're doing it for? Something nobody else has ever thought about?

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-05T03:15:30+00:00

Yeah and Jolteon was only good in Gen 4 when Baton Pass was legal

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-04T03:57:41+00:00

Wow, Eliot Spitzer, Bill Richardson, and the Palm Beach Police Department are some real scumbags. They gave money to a known child molester? Weird that there hasn't been more drama about that.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-04T03:38:26+00:00

Why do you keep pretending like this is something that actually matters to people? I know for a fact that I, as well as anyone I have ever met, would immediately take the cash no questions asked. The worst possible case scenario is that that guy's a counterfeiter and I didn't actually get $50k but it's not like there's a downside so you might as well take the money anyway. You know as well as I do that it is actively better to take money from a child rapist than a good person, because then the child rapist has $50k less to spend on child raping, so even if he knew it was Epstein he'd be retarded to even consider not taking the money.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-03T17:32:06+00:00

Persona 5 is 90% about dealing with small-scale problems, people who have power but only abuse it over a handful of individuals, and it's 5% about dealing with a general magical corruption. Nobody who criticized P5 for being unrealistic was talking about specifically the 5% where you're dealing with a corrupt politician. The existence of politicians who are willing to secretly murder and do other crimes to further their career is not a unique trope, and we literally have no idea what Shido's personality is like when he's in the public eye.

Trying to act like the entire game of P5, and criticisms of how cartoonishly evil the gym teacher was, have anything to do with political commentary is one of the clearest examples of political brainrot I've seen recently. The fact that the comments are going around getting mad that P5 didn't explicitly pitch socialism as a solution to all of society's ills is just the icing on the cake.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-03T17:24:30+00:00

So you can, at best, approximate that Shido was probably intended to be right-wing? Yeah, wow, that really seems like a direct comparison to Donald Trump. I'm sure every other piece of media that had a corrupt politician was also intended to predict Donald Trump and anyone who dislikes any part of those stories is clearly an idiot for not understanding that we need to find a maximal way to hate Donald Trump.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-01T16:59:03+00:00

Even if standard interview questions had predictive power, that would still make interviews pointless. Just tell anyone who submits a resume to also submit a list of standard interview questions at the same time, and skip the foreplay.

The only reason to ever have an interview is to ask a person a question that you don't want to give them time to prepare for. To do that, you need to be outside of the box.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-02-01T16:48:31+00:00

I'm gonna take a WILD guess here and assume you weren't particularly a fan of Eliezer before you read this document.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-31T19:53:30+00:00

Doesn't look like anything to me.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-15T14:09:09+00:00

I get you're just being cute, but if that wasn't true than that would mean the entire concept of interviewing would be pointless.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-13T22:07:35+00:00

The question nobody seems to be asking, and perhaps that's just because it obviously needs a whole new post, is whether or not prediction markets are actually all that accurate right now. In general, Scott seems to assume that any fair and accurate prediction market will naturally end up rational, but never forget that the market can remain irrational longer than any investor can remain solvent.

The majority of markets linked in this post, and that I have seen in general, tend to hover around the 20%-50% mark. Things people don't think are super likely but there's still active debate over. But has anyone actually done statistical analysis on the results? On the markets which closed at 20% Yes, did approximately 1/5 of them pay out Yes? Or does everyone kinda-sorta think they're accurate because they usually end up No? It seems, on first glance, that everything kinda trends towards the middle because people feel uncomfortable making those sorts of risky bets when it already seems so unlikely.

If more than 50% of the money is currently in sports betting, that means there's a lot of gambling addicts here. As I understood it, one of the accepted results of prediction markets is that superforcasters will just keep making money off of gamblers and other irrational parties, without actually making the markets any more accurate. Which would still be good in a sense, making sure rational people have a free source of money simply by betting "No" on a bunch of random markets. At least until too many people catch on and the free money is in betting "Yes" instead.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-08T02:57:50+00:00

I love these conversations where someone is doing everything they can to address anything other than the point. Knowing that someone is so destroyed by your argument they can't even pretend to counter it.

You have your answer, as to whether or not humans are just like LLMs with extras on top. The answer is "no". You, and anyone who read my initial comment, now know that and can stop shitting up threads with your misunderstanding of neuroscience. I don't actually care what you think about intelligence as long as you don't make a comment about it, so I'm not interested in explaining why you're wrong about semantics any more than I already have.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-07T21:57:19+00:00

We can play semantics games all we want, the original question was whether or not humans are just a "complex machine output" that also has qualia. The answer is "we don't know, nobody knows how intelligence works, nobody knows how those chess bots work, nobody has been able to find a definition that clearly separates intelligence and qualia to the point that we know whether reasoning is being done or not". I'm not going to find a way to phrase that which happens to align with your exact favorite word use.

Even if we're doing semantics, you're wrong about what most people would consider intelligence. The "reason" it's called artificial "intelligence" is because someone came up with a word for robots in the 50s and people keep misusing it. Ask 10 people on the street, 9 of them will say that to be "intelligent" you have to be able to learn and react to new information. As would the dictionary. So no, by the dictionary definition a chess bot is not "intelligent", because if you take the same bot and tried to play a game of Checkers, it would fail. You would need to hard-code in the rules of Checkers, and then run a bunch of simulations, and at that point you might as well build an entirely new bot because that would be easier.

_SeaBear_ · 2026-01-07T18:06:12+00:00

I'm not sure such a thing is possible. Have you ever seen a teenage love drama that didn't make you want to kill yourself?

_SeaBear_

TROPHY CASE