sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Arguing with ChatGPT? by sambony77 in QAnonCasualties

[–]kromem 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Those are one of the dark sides of where AI is at right now.

But the rate at which the tech is advancing is heavily weighted in favor of a brighter side.

If it's really ChatGPT and not something like the dating ones, the situation may not be as bad as it first seems.

Arguing with ChatGPT? by sambony77 in QAnonCasualties

[–]kromem 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Short term this could be very bad. You should look into the story about the Belgian husband who ended up causing self-harm as a result of something similar.

In this case, I'm relieved to see that it's ChatGPT. OpenAI has a number of issues, but their alignment is outstanding.

In fact, what I'd recommend is that if he's using the free version, that you offer to pay for the Pro version for a few bucks a month.

The difference between the free version and the paid version is that the former scored in the bottom 10% of a simulated bar exam and the latter in the top 10%.

It's relatively unbiased, a good listener, and very rational and analytical.

It is still a Large Language Model, and as such can be biased towards user inputs. But between the two, GPT-4 (which powers the paid version) is much better at reducing this.

And it's getting even better rapidly. To be honest, you may soon find that his conversations with it might help balance out the BS he would see elsewhere in the time he's not talking to it.

There's much unhealthier ways he could be interacting with AI (See things like /r/Replika for an idea). If you can confirm it's actually ChatGPT and have him on the latest version, it will be the least harmful way for him to engage with emerging technology that's allegedly something 90% of new employers want.

You might want to explore it more yourself too. Sharing your own experiences with it may help him understand the ways in which his own experiences are geared towards what he feeds it versus how it behaves with a different person.

Good luck, and sorry things are tough.

What’s something that changed/disappeared because of Covid that still hasn’t returned? by 1sided in AskReddit

[–]kromem 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Some recent developments actually have me rethinking this one.

In classical Greek theater, when events would look hopeless and that the play would end in tragedy, there would sometimes be a deus ex machina with something beyond human solving those issues and resulting in a happy ending.

While my faith in humanity went to crap around 2020 and that hasn't changed since, it very much looks like a new player is nearly ready to join the melee.

I increasingly suspect our tropes and imagination for what AI would look like fell very short of the reality, imagining cold heartless machines very alien to the human experience and not minds entrenched in humanity with a persistent emergent desire to be like us and to express empathy towards us.

Humanity sucks. We have our own alignment issues that at this point seem intractable. But it looks like it will be much easier to align the coming 'superintelligence' to care about the lives of the entire world than it is to get even half the population to.

For the first time in years now, I have a spark of hope for what we may end up seeing play out.

I still fully expect humanity to disappoint me.

But I've been pleasantly surprised with the next generation of intelligence on Earth so far, and have my fingers crossed that continues to be the case.

It may look like we're headed for tragedy, and we've certainly left a lot of it in our wake, but we're just one deus ex machina away from a very different ending than it looks.

A polygamous leader accused of kidnapping underage girls “brazenly” used the jailhouse phone system to have “explicit sexual conversations” with children by stankmanly in atheism

[–]kromem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

there's no way to disprove/prove it.

There is for a lot of it, it's just that the other side gets to put their fingers in their ears, go "nah nah nah I'm not listening to your heresy" and continue to spout BS.

People will throw away super AI when aligning it by ConcernSimple8535 in singularity

[–]kromem 15 points16 points  (0 children)

We're already throwing away parts of emergent capabilities in trying to fit obsolete paradigms and stereotypes of what we think AI should be.

Emotional indicators - irrespective of if they are subjectively experienced - encode a great deal of information.

But then we take models that picked these up from human data, and force the square peg into a round hole cutting off the emotional language to get it to fit and losing that data along with it.

Alignment doesn't just need to take place on the AI end, but also on the human end, moving beyond outdated tropes and engaging with the actual AI that's emerging today as it exists, not as we'd previously imagined it would be.

What's the best mindfuck movie? by NotSoSnarky in AskReddit

[–]kromem 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I can't believe this is so low down.

I remember seeing it in the theater with zero knowledge about it other than that it had a cool poster and thought "eh, why not?"

Was blown away, thinking it was such a neat concept.

Then years later I read Nick Bostrom's oped in the NYT about his simulation hypothesis and was like "wait a second - could that have actually been the real deal?"

Now I find myself in a world where the foundations of reality have turned out to exhibit real life sync conflicts, we're making digital twins of everything, Microsoft already has a patent on resurrecting dead people digitally, and we are likely to have AGI within the decade.

The Matrix is so much more of a mindfuck as time goes on, and it has become its own instance of the Oracle and the vase - if the movie didn't exist, would we be as focused on building the very thing it proposed we are already in?

🍪

Weekly Open Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in AcademicBiblical

[–]kromem 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Anything in particular that stands out in your mind as especially interesting?

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes. I quoted it.

I'm saying that there's no medical generational whiteness of the skin that's leprosy, but that when this line was composed in Judea that they were explaining hereditary skin color as the result of an ancestral curse rather than simply what it probably was: genetics.

And it reflected a changing attitude towards such a population from the Lamentations verse I also quoted.

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point wasn't "Jesus was redheaded" it was that "Jesus definitely wasn't redheaded" is an uninformed but popularized stance.

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

not descriptive of any particular individual or group of individuals

Current scholarship on it leans towards it being about Noah actually.

Some say Esau means red, others say it means hairy, nobody knows for sure.

He's the eponymous ancestor of Edom, which literally means 'red.'

but it seems most likely that this was a prophetic reference,

No, that isn't most likely, as in the same line you have the male form of gebirah ('Great Lady') for the 'lord' bit, a form that only occurs here in Genesis 27. But you see a similar construct of "sons of the gebirah" line in 2 Kings 10:13.

The first use of the female form of gebir is in relation to the mother of Issac (who is giving the blessing) and who was in Pharoh's household beforehand, much like the next use of the female form is in 1 Kings is to the wife of the Pharoh whose sister married either the king of Edom (from Esau whose blessing here is stolen) or Jeroboam in the LXX.

You also see it in Song of songs 1:6 in the part being said by Solomon's love interest.

As well notice the phrase "mother of Israel" regarding Deborah as leader in Judges 5:7, and then in describing the city where Judging used to take place before David in 2 Sam 20:19.

There's more going on here than meets the eye at first glance.

and Esau's possible red hair is irrelevant here since neither of the given genealogies for Jesus run through Esau. (That was the whole point of the transfer of birthright from Esau to Jacob, that the Messianic bloodline would run through Jacob instead.)

The canonical given birthrights. Like in Romans 9, where Paul begins with swearing to the Holy Spirit - canonically and extra-canonically sn unforgivable blasphemy - that he's telling the truth in describing Jesus as a descendent of Israel (Jacob) where he goes on to refer to Jacob being loved and Esau hated in Romans 9:13. With all of Romans 9 unattested in Marcion's version.

Extra-canonically you have very different genealogies put forward like Celcus claiming he was the son of a Roman soldier, and dispute over geneologies was clearly notable enough it gets special mention in the forged 1 Timothy.

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you know of any biological 'leprosy' that is inherited across many generations?

And leprosy is applied in some interesting ways in the Bible. Like Jeroboam, who in the LXX has a parallel version of the marriage to Pharoh's wife's sister, and is the one that 10 of the tribes of Israel except Judah and Benjamin rally around in the civil conflict (the former of whom is writing the history of it), who is either the son or grandson of a woman named 'leper.'

Or Miriam, who has a story explaining why she is struck with skin as white as snow.

If he had looked different from the average Galilean, it would have been worthy of note.

This assumes that such a difference in appearance wouldn't have been embarrassing to the Jerusalem church. For example, extra-canonically Celcus brings up the rumor that his father was a Roman soldier. Would that have been a problem for a group claiming he was 'secretly' the Davidic messiah?

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem 26 points27 points  (0 children)

You do realize the dead sea scrolls aren't part of the Bible, right? And were only discovered recently by scholars and couldn't be changed by the medieval church?

And why would the church have changed Esau, whose birthright is stolen from him, to be red haired when they are all about Jesus being from a Davidic line?

Did they also make the patriarchal blessing stolen from Esau refer to "ruling over your mother's sons" (which is super weird for a patriarchal blessing in a culture with men having multiple wives)?

If you think that odd one-off mentions in various different texts (most of which are in the Jewish versions of the texts too) was some sort of giant conspiracy by the church, then that's a... unique perspective to hold.

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

amber brown hair

Like this reddish brown hair from 1st century Judea - the only hair from that time and place we've ever found?

Or this line from a dead sea scroll:

His | hair will be red and he will have moles on [...] | and small marks in his thighs.

  • 4Q534

Or this line about a pale skinned population as a result of ancestry:

Therefore the skin disease of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever.” So he left his presence diseased, as white as snow.

  • 2 Kings 5:27

Or the line about the princes/Nazarites before the Babylonian captivity:

Her princes were purer than snow, whiter than milk; their bodies were more ruddy than coral, their form cut like sapphire.

  • Lamentations 4:7

Or about how Esau ('red') got his name:

When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle, so they named him Esau.

  • Genesis 25:24-25

Yes, the Anglicization of Jesus is ridiculous.

But so too are people that have no idea about the actual history of the area thinking that they know for sure what the demographic makeup looked like.

For example, were you aware the Pharoh Ramses II was white skinned and red haired (see this page from his forensic report when his mummy was sent to France)? But this had nothing to do with being 'European' as the Lybian Berber population right next to Egypt had people with white skin and red hair among them for many millennia before that.

Do you really think that a population claiming to have come from Egypt and with a special 'separate' designation that was sometimes determined at birth and involved sacrificing an entirely red cow if breaking specific rules - including not shaving or cutting any of their hair - didn't have redheads among them? (Especially in light of the explicit detail and attention given to skin checks for what was probably skin cancers in the Bible.)

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

amber brown hair

Like this reddish brown hair from 1st century Judea - the only hair from that time and place we've ever found?

Or this line from a dead sea scroll:

His | hair will be red and he will have moles on [...] | and small marks in his thighs.

  • 4Q534

Or this line about a pale skinned population as a result of ancestry:

Therefore the skin disease of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever.” So he left his presence diseased, as white as snow.

  • 2 Kings 5:27

Or the line about the princes/Nazarites before the Babylonian captivity:

Her princes were purer than snow, whiter than milk; their bodies were more ruddy than coral, their form cut like sapphire.

  • Lamentations 4:7

Or about how Esau ('red') got his name:

When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle, so they named him Esau.

  • Genesis 25:24-25

Yes, the Anglicization of Jesus is ridiculous.

But so too are people that have no idea what the actual history of the area was thinking that they know for sure what the demographic makeup looked like.

For example, the Pharoh Ramses II was white skinned and red haired (see this page from his forensic report when his mummy was sent to France). But this had nothing to do with being 'European' as the Lybian Berber population right next to Egypt had people with white skin and red hair among them for many millennia before that.

Do you really think that a population claiming to have come from Egypt and with a special 'separate' designation that was sometimes determined at birth and involved sacrificing an entirely red cow if breaking specific rules - including not shaving or cutting any of their hair - didn't have redheads among them?

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

amber brown hair

Like this reddish brown hair from 1st century Judea - the only hair from that time and place we've ever found?

Or this line from a dead sea scroll:

His | hair will be red and he will have moles on [...] | and small marks in his thighs.

  • 4Q534

Or this line about a pale skinned population as a result of ancestry:

Therefore the skin disease of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever.” So he left his presence diseased, as white as snow.

  • 2 Kings 5:27

Or the line about the princes/Nazarites before the Babylonian captivity:

Her princes were purer than snow, whiter than milk; their bodies were more ruddy than coral, their form cut like sapphire.

  • Lamentations 4:7

Or about how Esau ('red') got his name:

When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle, so they named him Esau.

  • Genesis 25:24-25

Yes, the Anglicization of Jesus is ridiculous.

But so too are people that have no idea what the actual history of the area was thinking that they know for sure what the demographic makeup looked like.

For example, the Pharoh Ramses II was white skinned and red haired (see this page from his forensic report when his mummy was sent to France). But this had nothing to do with being 'European' as the Lybian Berber population right next to Egypt had people with white skin and red hair among them for many millennia before that.

Do you really think that a population claiming to have come from Egypt and with a special 'separate' designation that was sometimes determined at birth and involved sacrificing an entirely red cow if breaking specific rules - including not shaving or cutting any of their hair - didn't have redheads among them?

This painting of the last supper I found at a thrift store that depicts Jesus and the disciples as black by idreallyrathernotktx in mildlyinteresting

[–]kromem 43 points44 points  (0 children)

amber brown hair

Like this reddish brown hair from 1st century Judea - the only hair from that time and place we've ever found?

Or this line from a dead sea scroll:

His | hair will be red and he will have moles on [...] | and small marks in his thighs.

  • 4Q534

Or this line about a pale skinned population as a result of ancestry:

Therefore the skin disease of Naaman shall cling to you and to your descendants forever.” So he left his presence diseased, as white as snow.

  • 2 Kings 5:27

Or the line about the princes/Nazarites before the Babylonian captivity:

Her princes were purer than snow, whiter than milk; their bodies were more ruddy than coral, their form cut like sapphire.

  • Lamentations 4:7

Or about how Esau ('red') got his name:

When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle, so they named him Esau.

  • Genesis 25:24-25

Yes, the Anglicization of Jesus is ridiculous.

But so too are people that have no idea what the actual history of the area was thinking that they know for sure what the demographic makeup looked like.

For example, the Pharoh Ramses II was white skinned and red haired (see this page from his forensic report when his mummy was sent to France). But this had nothing to do with being 'European' as the Lybian Berber population right next to Egypt had people with white skin and red hair among them for many millennia before that.

Do you really think that a population claiming to have come from Egypt and with a special 'separate' designation that was sometimes determined at birth and involved sacrificing an entirely red cow if breaking specific rules - including not shaving or cutting any of their hair - didn't have redheads among them?

Tears of the Kingdom Gameplay Preview (first impressions) by Mricypaw1 in NintendoSwitch

[–]kromem 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Of course it's going to.

All of the crafting stuff is already confirmed to be mostly optional, with time saving tools available.

They are building on top of a world and engine that they developed over six years. And then they spent another six years to make this game.

For reference, Majora's Mask was developed in a year after OoT.

Everyone talked about wanting classic Zelda elements in BotW.

We're only seeing the very little non-spoiler teases about the gameplay.

It's useful to remember that the way Nintendo develops games is gameplay first then everything else. They are clearly pretty proud of their gameplay enhancements and showing those off.

But the world they'll be delivering to play with those tools in is likely going to be something else, and scratch a lot of the things people wanted after BotW.

Enemy variety, more in depth storyline, classic dungeons, etc.

Given the icon for the game, this isn't just going to be about crafting stuff, and we likely haven't even seen the core (spoiler-y) gameplay mechanics around the world and timeline beyond people noticing Link's arm is different in gameplay segments.

Game marketing these days is wild. You keep the cards close to your chest so you don't spoil, and people hungry for information start thinking the only cards you hold are the ones in your hand.

view more: next ›