A lot of people misunderstanding you I think.

So you, a regular person, is only attracted to very attractive people, maybe a small number of which you’ve seen in real life and most through media. What to do?

Welcome to the 21st century unfortunately. Your brain was trained on potential mates who were likely accessible, near by, and likely within the realm of being a good pair with you. You were not designed to be exposed to the “best” humanity has to offer on a global scale of billions. You have been spoiled so to speak, your sensitivity is all out of whack.

Solutions? First, don’t lie in a relationship, especially if you already know you’d feel like a fraud. One option is to follow your conscience of not lying and so not entering into intimate relationships at all (because the other almost certainly needs you to appreciate them in that way). Another is to fast from media a while. All of it. You’re in an unnatural situation (biologically speaking) the solution is going to seem extreme but essentially reducing your horizon back to potential relationships of ‘ordinary’ people and nothing beyond. Therapy helps too. Might not work, but you could be surprised.

Are ‘average’ people attracted to their ‘average’ partner. Yes. Attraction works in very different ways in many people. They know celebrities are more ‘attractive’ but the reality and closeness of the person they’re with is what’s more important to them and makes that attraction more ‘real’. Did cavemen find cavewomen attractive? Yes. It was all they’d ever seen. Your brain is on the same hardware version.

It sucks really but, to take an analogy, you’re stuck with your regular food at home with Michelin star chefs serving up masterpieces on TV 24hrs a day. You feel dissatisfied with what your kitchen has to offer. But you can’t afford a fancy restaurant.

Well. Comparison is the thief of joy. Turn the TV off (so to speak). Experiment with some new ingredients to see if you can surprise yourself with what’s on hand.

You should probably also fast from porn for a while (if that’s your thing).

Have you ever been stuck orbiting the earth with a ground crew watching your vitals?

Just a small thing… I must have played Civ II for hundreds and hundreds of hours as a kid. Then one day a large civilization in civil disorder had its capital taken and one half of the empire seceded as a brand new civilization. I yelped… one of those joyful wtaf moments…

Is… this… a… bitcoin recovery pass… wtf?

:)

It’s been found. Adrian Thompson’s research from almost 30 years ago…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolvable_hardware

Yes! Exactly this thank you

For example, one group of gates has no logical connection to the rest of the circuit, yet is crucial to its function

(I should have gone with my gut, I knew it was ages ago. 30ish years by the sound of it!)

Maybe, but remember generative AI isn’t any kind of deductive or methodical reasoning. It’s literally “mash up the publicly available info and give a crowd sourced version of what to add next”. This works for art because this kind of random harmony appeals to us asthetically and art is an area where people seek fewer constraints. But when you’re engineering it’s the opposite. Maybe it’s useful to get engineers out of a rut and imagine new possibilities. But that’s it. Generative AI has no idea if what’s it’s smushed together is garbage or randomly insightful.

It makes a break from the AI slop usually dished up but yes I agree with you

I remember this too, it was years and years ago (I almost want to say 2010-2015). Can’t find anything searching for it

Read the article, it’s still ‘dreaming’ and spewing garbage, it’s just that in some iterations it’s gotten lucky. “Human oversight needed” they say. The AI has no idea what it’s doing.

Not money, power. There’ll always be affordable consumables: clothes, food etc. It’s just the quality will go down to accommodate how squeezed the consumer is. But the limited resources: a stay at that resort, a home with space and good schools, the seats at the sports game etc those the prices will continue to race away. Which is just a different view of power (choice/control) shifting into the hands of an increasingly small proportion of people. Those places will still be full - but the chance of getting to them for the average person will grow dimmer with every passing year.

Lots of VPN recommendations here but whenever I used one I got shadow banned about a week later. Worked from desktop, the bans came after using the web version from mobile in private mode. Different email etc. No idea how that was tracked, it doesn’t seem possible. Some suggested the mere use of VPN - especially for sign-up - leads to a delayed shadow ban later. But some have a different experience so I suppose it’s worth trying.

How can someone not value the ingenuity and creativity behind a work of art?

Their point of view is that if people do actually value this then there will always be a market for it.

If they don’t, there won’t.

I suppose a long time ago the radio and gramophone looked like they’d been the end of live performing musicians but they still exist, everything’s just continually changing…

For your info, this is known as ‘hand waving’

It’s not a very useful currency if deflation is making people hoard it…

I suppose it adds some context. They aren’t separate adoptive dads who’ve cooperated to abused their respective sons, neither did the state allow an adoption to two single straight men living together- that they’re a gay couple explains the situation.

Ok, that’s great. I get what you’re trying to do now.

I think in terms of getting input I can only suggest that deliberately invoking Cunningham’s law is probably going to get you more responses that anything else. You are honest and upfront about the code being unstable but this is unlikely to motivate someone to audit it for you. Simply stating it’s the most secure web chat available for x reasons is more likely to motivate someone to prove you wrong. Even if their motivations are negative you might still find the insight valuable…

I suspect such a model would have to be far more attuned to its data being smaller but trustworthy. Something like chatGPT for example requires a huge volume because it’s weakly affected by any particular datum going in. It’s designed to adapt to general conversation norms, rather than specific facts. If you could take a generalist like chatGPT and combine it with an expert model that’s been told everything it’s told has a huge weighting then that would probably be a big step forward.

urgh .

It can survive well where there’s editorial control. I’d talk to an AI if it had only read encyclopedias for example…