It’s actually somewhat effective in my experience. Another thing I’ve recently started doing is calling out mean comments. Nobody wants to think of themselves as a mean person but it’s quite difficult accusation to argue against when the evidence is right there in front of their face.

The discussion wasn’t about them being insistent on grandkids - it was about you being insistent on inheritance. If you think they’re being unreasonable, then it’s worth recognizing that your own insistence might be just as unreasonable.

You’re not obligated to have children - just like your dad isn’t obligated to leave you an inheritance.

False dichotomy - Assuming that because someone doesn’t agree with one viewpoint, they must fully support the opposite. Framing the issue as if there are only two mutually exclusive positions, when in fact there may be many shades in between.
Strawmanning - Misrepresenting someone’s argument - usually by exaggerating, distorting, or taking it out of context - so it’s easier to attack or refute.
Ad hominem - Attacking the character, motives, or other traits of the person making the argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself.
Reductionism - The tendency to reduce every complex issue to a single cause - like blaming everything on capitalism, fascism, patriarchy, etc. - while ignoring other contributing factors.
Moving the goalposts - Changing the criteria of an argument or shifting its focus once the original point has been addressed or challenged - usually to avoid conceding.
Hasty generalizations - Treating entire groups as if they’re uniform, attributing a trait or behavior of some individuals to all members of that group.
Oversimplification - Ignoring the nuance and complexity inherent in most issues, reducing them to overly simple terms or black-and-white thinking.

That’s why I keep making new accounts every time the last one hits around 1,000 comments. I already recognize quite a few users here who’ve only written around 3,000 comments total - so by that metric, if I’d just kept using my first account, I’d probably be instantly recognizable to a ton of people by now.

They’ll not going to be around forever so they want to know you’ll be able to look after yourself.

Samsung Galaxy XCover 6 Pro and early 2015 Retina MacBook Pro 13"

Artificial intelligence isn’t synonymous with LLMs. While there are clear issues with training LLMs on LLM-generated content, that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with the kind of technology that will eventually lead to AGI. If AI hallucinations are already often obvious to humans, they should be glaringly obvious to a true AGI - especially one that likely won’t even be based on an LLM architecture in the first place.

There’s one single thing in the entire universe that I’m absolutely certain of - something nothing could ever change my mind about: the fact that it feels like something to be. That there’s qualia, subjective experience. I could be a simulation, a brain in a vat, or something else entirely - but it’s undeniable that it is like something to be whatever “me” is. Everything else is up for debate.

Now, sure - there are things it would take a lot to convince me otherwise about, but I’m also not married to my ideas. I don’t attach my identity to them. I’ve been wrong before, and I’m almost certainly wrong about plenty of things even now. I don’t reject ideas just because I don’t like them. There are uncomfortable truths in this world, and not believing them doesn’t make them untrue. Even politically, it would be statistically absurd to think one side is right about everything and the other side is wrong about everything. It’s a mix. The challenge is figuring out where you are mistaken.

As for the examples you mentioned - homosexuality and transsexuality are human-made labels, ways to describe patterns we see. But like all labels, they’re rough generalizations. The differences between individuals even within these groups are vast - so much so that it starts to put the usefulness of the label itself into question. Personally, I’m just me. Tomorrow I’ll be a slightly different version of me. I don’t even fully identify with who I was yesterday - let alone some rigid label that society wants to stick on me.

It’s quite hard for someone who haven’t done it before. It’ll take months if not years of daily driving for you to get good enough that you don’t need to constantly think about it. There’s differences between vehicles too, especially with how the clutch feels. I’ve been driving manual for over 15 years and if I jump into a unfamiliar car it’ll take me a while to get the handle of it as well.

I remember seeing this video of two indian(?) guys drowning in a pond literally 2 meters from the shore. I mean… If I knew I couldn’t swim I wouldn’t go anywhere near water. It could just as well be lava.

I wish I could do this with the web version. I’d like to tag people “Made sense once - don’t block”

Somewhat related is the belief that things are simple rather than complex. I’d argue that thinking something is simple - or believing you have a solid understanding of it - should be a red flag that you probably don’t know as much as you think. I mean, when have you ever heard a true expert give a short and simple answer to anything?

Changing tires or oil on a car.

Time after time, I see people who should know better fail at basic things like this.

Even I don’t get called out for AI-written responses, even though a big number of my messages here are technically written by AI. The key difference is that I actually take the time to write a first draft of what I want to say, then run it through ChatGPT to help clean up my word salad - and finally, I go over the output again to make it sound like me. The thinking is mine. AI just helps me communicate more clearly.

I’d never ask it to write an entire response from scratch without providing structure or points I want to make. All I want is for the person reading my message to understand what I’m actually trying to say - so they can respond to that, not to a misinterpretation of what I was trying to say.

I’ll just leave that first draft here to illustrate my point:

Time after time I see people that should know better to fail at basic things like this.

Even I don’t get called out for AI responses even though a huge number of my messages posted here are technically written by AI. However, the difference here is that I actually took time to first write the first draft of what I want to say only then to give it for chatGPT to make sense of my word salad only for me to then go over it’s output to make it sound like me again. The thinking is done by me - AI only helps me to communicate more clearly. I’d never ask it to write the entire response from ground up without providing any structure and points about what I want to say. All I want is the person reading this message to get as clear of an understanding as possible of what I’m trying to say so that they can respond to that rather than to misintrepretation of what I was trying to say.

If I’m not mistaken, the gender pay gap has already reversed when you look specifically at Millennials and Gen Z. On average, women in these generations are both more highly educated and earning more than their male peers. That makes sense anecdotally too. Thinking back to my time in school, it definitely wasn’t us guys who were thriving in that environment.

Finland - and zero days, since I’m self-employed. On the other hand, I can take a day (or even a week) off whenever I feel like it, and I only need to work about three days a week to cover my living expenses.

At my previous job, I used to get somewhere between 30 to 40 days of paid time off per year. It varied depending on the year and how many public holidays landed on weekdays.

The bar exam isn’t created by OpenAI, yet the outdated GPT-4 model still ranked in the 90th percentile on it.

I don’t think this is your problem but her’s. If you’re only interested in sex and she isn’t then there’s no future between you two. The best you can offer her is honesty.

How about someone who isn’t 300 years old?