[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 11 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I really don't get it. they see something they don't understand and immediately start writhing on their keyboards in rage. "what the FUCK is THIS"

1

archive link

https://archive.ph/n3Ffq

Judge Mehta’s Google decision is likely to be appealed. “Regardless of who wins or loses, this case probably has a date with the Supreme Court,” Mr. Kovacic said.

ah well

1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by sc_griffith@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems

"subreddit rules. Speak pro-ai thoughts freely."

DefendingAIArt is a subreddit run by mod "Trippy-Worlds," who also runs the debate sister subreddit AIWars. Some poking around made clear that AIWars is perfectly fine with having overt Nazis around, for example a guy with heil hitler in his name who accuses others of lying because they are "spiritually jewish." So we're off to a great start.

the first thing that drew my eye was this post from a would be employer:

My hobby is making games. Every artist have spoken to regarding my current project has rejected currency in exchange for referencing Al-made images.

not really clear what the title means, but this person seems to have had a string of encounters with the most based artists of all time.

Has anyone experienced this? They see Al work and lose their mind, some even have the nads to expect to get a pay multiplier to 'compensate" for the "theft" like my surname is fucking Altman. Like, bro, I can barely afford your highly- accomplished and talented ass and would be doing it for myself if had your skillset, yet you reject my money with prejudice because pushed my shitty programmer art a bit further with a piece of software which can't even use to a fraction of its full potential? That's a greeeeeeeeaaa way to convince me to keep your artstation username out of my prompts to public models, even if believe that particular spirit of behavior should be illegal

also claims to have been called "racial and gender slurs" for using ai art and that he was "kicked out of 20 groups" and some other things. idk what to tell this guy, it legitimately does suck that wealthy people have the money to pay for lots of art and the rest of us don't

Could we Ban the "No Al" Symbol? Someone proposed an idea to me: why not gather evidence and present it to the authorities who prohibited the display of the Swastika and other hate symbols? I was impressed by this suggestion. After researching, I found out that there are organizations that can categorize it as illegal if we can show evidence of the harm it has caused. I believe we can unite people, including artists who have suffered due to false accusations by anti-Al rioters, to support this cause. If we all sign a petition, we can ban the symbol, which would prevent its misuse on platforms like DeviantArt and stop the spread of misinformation. Would you support this initiative? Would you sign to end ignorance and compel them to advocate for fair regulations for Al, ensuring that nobody has to encounter this symbol and that those who use it for malicious purposes find no refuge?Or is it just not possible? Let's discuss.

I really enjoyed browsing around this subreddit, and a big part of that was seeing how much the stigma around AI gets to people who want to use it. pouring contempt on this stuff is good for the world

the above guy would like to know what combination of buttons to press to counter the "that just sounds like stealing from artists" attack. a commenter leaps in to help and immediately impales himself:

'just block and move on' 'these are my real life friends' 'oh...'

you hate to see it. another commenter points out that well ... maybe these people just aren't your friends

'antis will always just stab you in the back'

to close out, an example of fearmongering:

So I made a post on a sub with a rule against Alart and the Auto-mod does this...I'm assuming its fearmongering right? automod: Your comments and posts are being sold by Reddit to Google to train Al. You cannot opt out.

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 28 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)
[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 25 points 5 months ago

it's the opposite, he says his ass being big indicates he is stupid. zero points to you for scientific rigor my friend

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 29 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

honestly I just couldn't bring myself to copy paste that. easily the worst part

EDIT: have they considered offering a huge cash prize to anyone who proves them wrong

71
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by sc_griffith@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

saw this posted by @sailor_sega_saturn at https://awful.systems/comment/3871697

op has a simple question:

Why are trans women so intellectually successful? They seem to be overrepresented 5-100x in eg cybersecurity twitter, mathy AI alignment, non-scam crypto twitter, math PhD programs, etc.

and a skull shaped answer:

My theory is that too much testosterone makes you dumber, particularly during adolescence. You need a little for your cells & organs to work, but past a certain point it does more harm than good (for intelligence specifically — motivation & happiness etc aside). Apparently this is not a new theory and people have posited a U-shaped curve for how testosterone affects IQ. The key (sad) claim is that the vast majority of men are on the too-much-T side of the curve. Maybe trans women get the best of both worlds intellectually — a male skull with female chemistry.

our researcher sets about fending off possible objections:

Why didn't evolution give females big heads if it would make them all geniuses? Another anecdote. My sister has a big head. She was valedictorian in high school I think. She hit her head one day in middle school during gym class by running into a wall. She also fell off a bike and hit her head in high school. I have never hit my head and I think the main reason is that my arms are strong enough to catch myself. So maybe the big headed women would-be-ancestors fell and hit their heads.

cites chatgpt for this:

Do trans men get the worst of both worlds intellectually — female skulls and male chemistry? Yes.

demonstrates the exceptional explanatory power of his hypothesis:

Why are really good tech founders so rare? You have to have very high power-seeking/initiative (T) and very high IQ. This is an incredibly rare combination because the testosterone murders your IQ. You have to be a genius before puberty hits. Helps if your brain/head is giant. Look at eg Elon Musk & Jeff Bezos.

describes the potential impact of his research:

I suspect that some simple electrical stimulation in the womb could make infant females' skulls bigger and result in lots of genius women. If they don't fall off their bikes and hit their heads.

all time great footnotes:

Thought of some more potential evidence. The smartest cis women I've known almost all had lack of butt (women's most visible muscle -- so low testosterone?)

Later that day: i asked my sister. She said all her smart friends (men and women) lack butts too! She and I both have the butt, so we are speaking against our own kind here.

a commenter has an epistemically rigorous counterpoint:

I don't understand why you need to invoke testosterone. Transgender brain is special, for example, transgender women have immunity to visual illusions.

another commenter objects to that, based on a deep dive into the literature:

Can you source this claim? I've never heard it and GPT-4 says it has no scientific basis.

"well admittedly I made it up, but it seems plausible"

Whoops, it's really looks like I imagined this claim to be backed more than by one SSC post. In my defense I say that this poll covered really existing thing like abnormal illusions processing in schizophrenics (see "Systematic review of visual illusions schizophrenia" Costa et al., 2023) and I think it's overall plausible.

archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20240706165407/https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/BBCtWtg44Yeh6fire/is-being-a-trans-woman-or-just-low-t-20-iq

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 80 points 7 months ago

Historians have a word for Germans who joined the Nazi party, not because they hated Jews, but out of a hope for restored patriotism, or a sense of economic anxiety, or a hope to preserve their religious values, or dislike of their opponents, or raw political opportunism, or convenience, or ignorance, or greed. That word is "Nazi."

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 34 points 7 months ago

you shoulda lied

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 52 points 7 months ago

my husband and I are just trying to repopulate the world

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 54 points 7 months ago

you would never see a scene like this in a Nazi household

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 40 points 7 months ago

we're actually very liberal

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 43 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

again. NOT Nazis.

220
we're not Nazis btw (awful.systems)
[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 26 points 9 months ago

he's clearly still convinced that if you could just purge the degenerates you'd get a utopia. but his post is a nice illustration of how if that actually happens they'll just keep inventing new ways to classify people as degenerate. fascists need, at all times, a face to stamp on

35

I'm doing it so skillfully. I'm totally basilisking you. isn't that scary

[-] sc_griffith@awful.systems 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Often, things become crimes that get prosecuted when they are done by the wealthy vs. normal people. To be clear, the reason for this is that governments/prosecutors want money and there is a lot of money in going after Kjell Inge Røkke for an illegal boating license but there isn't for a father letting his 15-year old child drive in a parking lot. There's a lot of money going after a billionaire for tax evasion but not in someone having a side hustle where they make money under the table selling $50k worth of widgets per year.

lmao

I suppose I recommend people think something like "ok, how bad was this really" when they look at billionaire crimes.

double lmao. triple, even

The rates do seem subjectively very high. Way fewer than 10% of people I know have been convicted of financial crimes! But I wonder if founders and CEOs are being blamed for financial crimes that their companies commit, and approximately all successful companies commit financial crimes, defined broadly.

so... close...

22
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by sc_griffith@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

saw this pointed out here and felt it deserved it's own post

let me mention that this is exactly the sort of argument I've seen pedophilia enthusiasts break out many times:

hmm, we thoughtful inquirers should look at this incredibly tenous evidence I've curated. it raises questions about whether we should be superrrrr chill about sex with children. questions with answers that, I'm sold on!

12
view more: next ›

sc_griffith

joined 1 year ago