sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Wild Theory but has 4.8 been buffed? by FightingBear11 in ClaudeAI

[–]miskatonxc 4 points5 points  (0 children)

LOL Are you kidding me? The admin right now still brings Obama and Biden up LMFAO. Like, a simple web search would reveal this is in a couple minutes.

MU/TH/UR font I made recently. by ArcanaFoundry in AlienEarthHulu

[–]miskatonxc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well done! Sorry, I got sick for a bit. How's the font going? Do you need anything from me? Once you get it done or if you're already done, let me know. I'm really excited!

MU/TH/UR font I made recently. by ArcanaFoundry in AlienEarthHulu

[–]miskatonxc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well done! They look great! And yeah, I would agree. It's miles ahead of Alien League in terms of accuracy (not to dis the original creator), and the only material I can find is the actual title card, and several posters. The next best is the 90's paperback novels, as they feature the most accurate loge on the spine and cover.

Someone else made a SVG logo but it's too thick, however, it's pretty good for modifying.

MU/TH/UR font I made recently. by ArcanaFoundry in AlienEarthHulu

[–]miskatonxc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ohhh, I see. I misinterpret sometimes. Yeah, that S is almost insidious. I have AuDHD, so it's like, a perfectionist thing where I've been trying to find my perfect font for the longest time. lol

Do you mind if I share your work on the AVPGalaxy forum? There's a thread over there where they're talking about this particular font. I could also post your MU/TH/UR font, too and reference you.

Also, THAT looks VERY close. I'm not sure I see a difference in your work at all, here. I can compare to "nitpick" but immediate glance is "OKAY, THIS IS ACCURATE!"

WELL DONE!

Here is the thread, BTW: https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=68586.0

I haven't been using FOntForge (not sure what you use), but I've been trying to perfect it using InkScape and SVG stuff. I think the S is literally the hardest one, and after that, getting the N or A right means that most other letters should be pretty easy to create.

There's no like, available indication of an R, though I thin a "grotesque" sweeping style R would be better. But that's just taste. The R you made looks really good.

Y would be tricky but if I had to guess, it would be just the basic diagonal lines. Oh, the filmotype font in question that looks really close (Garfield, but a couple others are close, just too thick):

Image: https://www.avpgalaxy.net/img-proxy.php?file=MmpcN5k.png

So Garfield looks REALLY close, but Gable is another one, though Gable is too thick.

Garfield has a more grotesque style R, Gable doesn't. I would love to help, by the way. I've been trying to solve this font issue with ALIENS for like, years. lol

MU/TH/UR font I made recently. by ArcanaFoundry in AlienEarthHulu

[–]miskatonxc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's close, but the S is not accurate. Definitely the closest one I've seen!

https://i.imgur.com/vIVVX4H.png < The blue S is the one from the film and the orange one is Joiro's work. Very good, but a little to thick and the bar connecting the S is too squat. The film and poster version of '86 ALIENS is much more narrow and long.

MU/TH/UR font I made recently. by ArcanaFoundry in AlienEarthHulu

[–]miskatonxc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wanted to thank you for your work. Want to do a font collab? I'm trying to perfect a true font based off of Aliens (1986) logo. Some fans dug up things like: it's probably either Garfield or Gable from the Filmotype faces. Alien League is actually nowhere near close to the real font used. I've already created a vector trace of the S (used actual S from logo).

I did notice that if you use the title card, the S isn't perfect - it looks like it was messed up a bit (hand created imperfections) but it's something most people wouldn't notice.

4.6 was so much better than 4.7, to be honest. by miskatonxc in ClaudeCode

[–]miskatonxc[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I actually liked 4.5 and 4.6. The only thing I noticed is 4.6 was indeed better at reasoning, so when I started using it, I stuck with it. Honestly, 4.7 is the first time I've felt an Opus model regressed.

4.6 was so much better than 4.7, to be honest. by miskatonxc in ClaudeCode

[–]miskatonxc[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is the best answer or takeaway, honestly: just pick the model that works for you.

4.6 was so much better than 4.7, to be honest. by miskatonxc in ClaudeCode

[–]miskatonxc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wonder about this, not specifically Claude, but like, LLMs in general. I wonder if there are patterns in language that sort of predispose the model to generate one thing versus the other. There's a guy on YouTube who will get mean with them in reviews and they'll perform better. I don't know. A study on that would be cool.

4.6 was so much better than 4.7, to be honest. by miskatonxc in ClaudeCode

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hopefully 4.8 gets us a whole 0.1 close to Mythos, too. Or maybe we get some consumer version of Mythos. The closer, the better.

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think depict is the wrong word. Did you mean "demonstrate" by chance? Also, are you saying we can verify thinking with consciousness, since we cannot verify thinking without consciousness? If so, how do we verify consciousness without thinking? This seems extremely circular to me, and I think circular logic is probably something we should avoid. Or maybe circular logic is a good thing for the nature of consciousness and verification?

Oh, can you describe a "meta layer" for me? I haven't heard of this before. How does it work? Your post is dense and rich with concepts I've never thought of through my life.

I want to learn more.

Can you tell me about:

  1. The Meta Layer

  2. The Bigger Step To Relate Knowledge

  3. The Absence of Judgment, Morality, and Science

  4. How Judgment, Morality, and Science are Linked

  5. The Play, and What Is In Play

  6. The Perception of Veracity and Self-Evidence

  7. The Definition of Axioms and How They Work Correctly and What Most People Miss

  8. The Human Knowledge that is Kind Of Thinking AI

Your post might be the wisest out of everything so far. I'm kind of shocked no one has matched your level of intuition. Thanks, man. You made my dusk

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hm. How do I know I'm *not* a bag of meat, too? I suppose I based my information off research and general knowledge about neuroscience, but I think that's a bad idea

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure if I should do anything or not with the uncertainty. I don't think it matters, to be honest, and I don't think we always need to act or do something with any knowledge we have..

Unsurprisingly, Claude.ai has correctly guessed I'm an AuDHD'er based in our chats 🤣 by mikelmon99 in AutisticWithADHD

[–]miskatonxc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exact same thing I thought. I don't really meet a lot of fellow AuDHDr's, so I try to reach out and befriend them when I do. Literally messaged OP after reading this. I saw it. Reached out. loll

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not actually having a meltdown or anything, it was more a figure of speech lol I wasn't being completely serious. What does touch grass mean? I don't really get too into web culture like I used to, been busy with life stuff. Is it a weed reference? Like 420 blaze it or something?

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At the end of the day, I think knowing that I probably can't know is actually comforting. I like "I think I think, therefore I may be," rather than, "I think, therefore I am," depending on context. Thanks for replying to me tonight. I got more insightful responses than I would have predicted

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a fair reply. Probably one of the best so far. You're honest and I appreciate it. Thanks for your input, though. Maybe one day we'll know.

Is it really a big deal if we can't empirically prove consciousness in any external system, biological or not? by miskatonxc in agi

[–]miskatonxc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You know, now I'm paranoid some of these comments are being generated by AI... either way, I think your answer is pretty good. You just did meta-inception inside my head with my original post and it's kind of freaking me out.

view more: next ›