#and even worse is using chat gpt

[2kinkycubangemini]

You're really gonna use chat gpt and not proofread it before sending??? Yikes.

[xiaojaan]

its getting worse and worse

[ceaselessbasher]

"Click here to make our AI rewrite your text with more flair" "suggested AI images" "ask our AI copilot your questions" "don't worry, our helpful AI friend will fill in all these fields for you"

SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UUUUUUPPPPPPPPPP

[mostlysignssomeportents]

AI turns Amazon coders into Amazon warehouse workers

HEY SEATTLE! I'm appearing at the Cascade PBS Ideas Festival NEXT SATURDAY (May 31) with the folks from NPR's On The Media!

On a recent This Machine Kills episode, guest Hagen Blix described the ultimate form of "AI therapy" with a "human in the loop":

https://soundcloud.com/thismachinekillspod/405-ai-is-the-demon-god-of-capital-ft-hagen-blix

One actual therapist is just having ten chat GPT windows open where they just like have five seconds to interrupt the chatGPT. They have to scan them all and see if it says something really inappropriate. That's your job, to stop it.

Blix admits that's not where therapy is at…yet, but he references Laura Preston's 2023 N Plus One essay, "HUMAN_FALLBACK," which describes her as a backstop to a real-estate "virtual assistant," that masqueraded as a human handling the queries that confused it, in a bid to keep the customers from figuring out that they were engaging with a chatbot:

https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-44/essays/human_fallback/

This is what makes investors and bosses slobber so hard for AI – a "productivity" boost that arises from taking away the bargaining power of workers so that they can be made to labor under worse conditions for less money. The efficiency gains of automation aren't just about using fewer workers to achieve the same output – it's about the fact that the workers you fire in this process can be used as a threat against the remaining workers: "Do your job and shut up or I'll fire you and give your job to one of your former colleagues who's now on the breadline."

This has been at the heart of labor fights over automation since the Industrial Revolution, when skilled textile workers took up the Luddite cause because their bosses wanted to fire them and replace them with child workers snatched from Napoleonic War orphanages:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/26/enochs-hammer/#thats-fronkonsteen

Textile automation wasn't just about producing more cloth – it was about producing cheaper, worse cloth. The new machines were so easy a child could use them, because that's who was using them – kidnapped war orphans. The adult textile workers the machines displaced weren't afraid of technology. Far from it! Weavers used the most advanced machinery of the day, and apprenticed for seven years to learn how to operate it. Luddites had the equivalent of a Masters in Engineering from MIT.

Weavers' guilds presented two problems for their bosses: first, they had enormous power, thanks to the extensive training required to operate their looms; and second, they used that power to regulate the quality of the goods they made. Even before the Industrial Revolution, weavers could have produced more cloth at lower prices by skimping on quality, but they refused, out of principle, because their work mattered to them.

Now, of course weavers also appreciated the value of their products, and understood that innovations that would allow them to increase their productivity and make more fabric at lower prices would be good for the world. They weren't snobs who thought that only the wealthy should go clothed. Weavers had continuously adopted numerous innovations, each of which increased the productivity and the quality of their wares.

Long before the Luddite uprising, weavers had petitioned factory owners and Parliament under the laws that guaranteed the guilds the right to oversee textile automation to ensure that it didn't come at the price of worker power or the quality of the textiles the machines produced. But the factory owners and their investors had captured Parliament, which ignored its own laws and did nothing as the "dark, Satanic mills" proliferated. Luddites only turned to property destruction after the system failed them.

Now, it's true that eventually, the machines improved and the fabric they turned out matched and exceeded the quality of the fabric that preceded the Industrial Revolution. But there's nothing about the way the Industrial Revolution unfolded – increasing the power of capital to pay workers less and treat them worse while flooding the market with inferior products – that was necessary or beneficial to that progress. Every other innovation in textile production up until that time had been undertaken with the cooperation of the guilds, who'd ensured that "progress" meant better lives for workers, better products for consumers, and lower prices. If the Luddites' demands for co-determination in the Industrial Revolution had been met, we might have gotten to the same world of superior products at lower costs, but without the immiseration of generations of workers, mass killings to suppress worker uprisings, and decades of defective products being foisted on the public.

So there are two stories about automation and labor: in the dominant narrative, workers are afraid of the automation that delivers benefits to all of us, stand in the way of progress, and get steamrollered for their own good, as well as ours. In the other narrative, workers are glad to have boring and dangerous parts of their work automated away and happy to produce more high-quality goods and services, and stand ready to assess and plan the rollout of new tools, and when workers object to automation, it's because they see automation being used to crush them and worsen the outputs they care about, at the expense of the customers they care for.

In modern automation/labor theory, this debate is framed in terms of "centaurs" (humans who are assisted by technology) and "reverse-centaurs" (humans who are conscripted to assist technology):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/12/algorithmic-wage-discrimination/#fishers-of-men

There are plenty of workers who are excited at the thought of using AI tools to relieve them of some drudgework. To the extent that these workers have power over their bosses and their working conditions, that excitement might well be justified. I hear a lot from programmers who work on their own projects about how nice it is to have a kind of hypertrophied macro system that can generate and tweak little automated tools on the fly so the humans can focus on the real, chewy challenges. Those workers are the centaurs, and it's no wonder that they're excited about improved tooling.

But the reverse-centaur version is a lot darker. The reverse-centaur coder is an assistant to the AI, charged with being a "human in the loop" who reviews the material that the AI produces. This is a pretty terrible job to have.

For starters, the kinds of mistakes that AI coders make are the hardest mistakes for human reviewers to catch. That's because LLMs are statistical prediction machines, spicy autocomplete that works by ingesting and analyzing a vast corpus of written materials and then producing outputs that represent a series of plausible guesses about which words should follow one another. To the extent that the reality the AI is participating in is statistically smooth and predictable, AI can often make eerily good guesses at words that turn into sentences or code that slot well into that reality.

But where reality is lumpy and irregular, AI stumbles. AI is intrinsically conservative. As a statistically informed guessing program, it wants the future to be like the past:

https://reallifemag.com/the-apophenic-machine/

This means that AI coders stumble wherever the world contains rough patches and snags. Take "slopsquatting." For the most part, software libraries follow regular naming conventions. For example, there might be a series of text-handling libraries with names like "text.parsing.docx," "text.parsing.xml," and "text.parsing.markdown." But for some reason – maybe two different projects were merged, or maybe someone was just inattentive – there's also a library called "text.txt.parsing" (instead of "text.parsing.txt").

AI coders are doing inference based on statistical analysis, and anyone inferring what the .txt parsing library is called would guess, based on the other libraries, that it was "text.parsing.txt." And that's what the AI guesses, and so it tries to import that library to its software projects.

This creates a new security vulnerability, "slopsquatting," in which a malicious actor creates a library with the expected name, which replicates the functionality of the real library, but also contains malicious code:

https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/12/ai_code_suggestions_sabotage_supply_chain/

Note that slopsquatting errors are extremely hard to spot. As is typical with AI coding errors, these are errors that are based on continuing a historical pattern, which is the sort of thing our own brains do all the time (think of trying to go up a step that isn't there after climbing to the top of a staircase). Notably, these are very different from the errors that a beginning programmer whose work is being reviewed by a more senior coder might make. These are the very hardest errors for humans to spot, and these are the errors that AIs make the most, and they do so at machine speed:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/23/maximal-plausibility/#reverse-centaurs

To be a human in the loop for an AI coder, a programmer must engage in sustained, careful, line-by-line and command-by-command scrutiny of the code. This is the hardest kind of code to review, and maintaining robotic vigilance over long periods at high speeds is something humans are very bad at. Indeed, it's the kind of task we try very hard to automate, since machines are much better at being machineline than humans are. This is the essence of reverse-centaurism: when a human is expected to act like a machine in order to help the machine do something it can't do.

Humans routinely fail at spotting these errors, unsurprisingly. If the purpose of automation is to make superior goods at lower prices, then this would be a real concern, since a reverse-centaur coding arrangement is bound to produce code with lurking, pernicious, especially hard-to-spot bugs that present serious risks to users. But if the purpose of automation is to discipline labor – to force coders to accept worse conditions and pay – irrespective of the impact on quality, then AI is the perfect tool for the job. The point of the human isn't to catch the AI's errors so much as it is to catch the blame for the AI's errors – to be what Madeleine Clare Elish calls a "moral crumple zone":

https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/260

As has been the case since the Industrial Revolution, the project of automation isn't just about increasing productivity, it's about weakening labor power as a prelude to lowering quality. Take what's happened to the news industry, where mass layoffs are being offset by AI tools. At Hearst's King Features Syndicates, a single writer was charged with producing over 30 summer guides, the entire package:

https://www.404media.co/viral-ai-generated-summer-guide-printed-by-chicago-sun-times-was-made-by-magazine-giant-hearst/

That is an impossible task, which is why the writer turned to AI to do his homework, and then, infamously, published a "summer reading guide" that was full of nonexistent books that were hallucinated by a chatbot:

https://www.404media.co/chicago-sun-times-prints-ai-generated-summer-reading-list-with-books-that-dont-exist/

Most people reacted to this story as a consumer issue: they were outraged that the world was having a defective product foisted upon it. But the consumer issue here is downstream from the labor issue: when the writers at King Features Syndicate are turned into reverse-centaurs, they will inevitably produce defective outputs. The point of the worker – the "human in the loop" – isn't to supervise the AI, it's to take the blame for the AI. That's just what happened, as this poor schmuck absorbed an internet-sized rasher of shit flung his way by outraged social media users. After all, it was his byline on the story, not the chatbot's. He's the moral crumple-zone.

The implication of this is that consumers and workers are class allies in the automation wars. The point of using automation to weaken labor isn't just cheaper products – it's cheaper, defective products, inflicted on the unsuspecting and defenseless public who are no longer protected by workers' professionalism and pride in their jobs.

That's what's going on at Duolingo, where CEO Luis von Ahn created a firestorm by announcing mass firings of human language instructors, who would be replaced by AI. The "AI first" announcement pissed off Duolingo's workers, of course, but what caught von Ahn off-guard was how much this pissed off Duolingo's users:

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/05/25/0347239/duolingo-faces-massive-social-media-backlash-after-ai-first-comments

But of course, this makes perfect sense. After all, language-learners are literally incapable of spotting errors in the AI instruction they receive. If you spoke the language well enough to spot the AI's mistakes, you wouldn't need Duolingo! I don't doubt that there are countless ways in which AIs could benefit both language learners and the Duolingo workers who develop instructional materials, but for that to happen, workers' and learners' needs will have to be the focus of AI integration. Centaurs could produce great language learning materials with AI – but reverse-centaurs can only produce slop.

Unsurprisingly, many of the most successful AI products are "bossware" tools that let employers monitor and discipline workers who've been reverse-centaurized. Both blue-collar and white-collar workplaces have filled up with "electronic whips" that monitor and evaluate performance:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/02/despotism-on-demand/#virtual-whips

AI can give bosses "dashboards" that tell them which Amazon delivery drivers operate their vehicles with their mouths open (Amazon doesn't let its drivers sing on the job). Meanwhile, a German company called Celonis will sell your boss a kind of AI phrenology tool that assesses your "emotional quality" by spying on you while you work:

https://crackedlabs.org/en/data-work/publications/processmining-algomanage

Tech firms were among the first and most aggressive adopters of AI-based electronic whips. But these whips weren't used on coders – they were reserved for tech's vast blue-collar and contractor workforce: clickworkers, gig workers, warehouse workers, AI data-labelers and delivery drivers.

Tech bosses tormented these workers but pampered their coders. That wasn't out of any sentimental attachment to tech workers. Rather, tech bosses were afraid of tech workers, because tech workers possess a rare set of skills that can be harnessed by tech firms to produce gigantic returns. Tech workers have historically been princes of labor, able to command high salaries and deferential treatment from their bosses (think of the amazing tech "campus" perks), because their scarcity gave them power.

It's easy to predict how tech bosses would treat tech workers if they could get away with it – just look how they treat workers they aren't afraid of. Just like the textile mill owners of the Industrial Revolution, the thing that excites tech bosses about AI is the possibility of cutting off a group of powerful workers at the knees. After all, it took more than a century for strong labor unions to match the power that the pre-Industrial Revolution guilds had. If AI can crush the power of tech workers, it might buy tech bosses a century of free rein to shift value from their workforce to their investors, while also doing away with pesky Tron-pilled workers who believe they have a moral obligation to "fight for the user."

William Gibson famously wrote, "The future is here, it's just not evenly distributed." The workers that tech bosses don't fear are living in the future of the workers that tech bosses can't easily replace.

This week, the New York Times's veteran Amazon labor report Noam Scheiber published a deeply reported piece about the experience of coders at Amazon in the age of AI:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/25/business/amazon-ai-coders.html

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy is palpably horny for AI coders, evidenced by investor memos boasting of AI's returns in "productivity and cost avoidance" and pronouncements about AI saving "the equivalent of 4,500 developer-years":

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/andy-jassy-8b1615_one-of-the-most-tedious-but-critical-tasks-activity-7232374162185461760-AdSz/

Amazon is among the most notorious abusers of blue-collar labor, the workplace where everyone who doesn't have a bullshit laptop job is expected to piss in a bottle and spend an unpaid hour before and after work going through a bag- and body-search. Amazon's blue-collar workers are under continuous, totalizing, judging AI scrutiny that scores them based on whether their eyeballs are correctly oriented, whether they take too long to pick up an object, whether they pee too often. Amazon warehouse workers are injured at three times national average. Amazon AIs scan social media for disgruntled workers talking about unions, and Amazon has another AI tool that predicts which shops and departments are most likely to want to unionize.

Scheiber's piece describes what it's like to be an Amazon tech worker who's getting the reverse-centaur treatment that has heretofore been reserved for warehouse workers and drivers. They describe "speedups" in which they are moved from writing code to reviewing AI code, their jobs transformed from solving chewy intellectual puzzles to racing to spot hard-to-find AI coding errors as a clock ticks down. Amazon bosses haven't ordered their tech workers to use AI, just raised their quotas to a level that can't be attained without getting an AI to do most of the work – just like the Chicago Sun-Times writer who was expected to write all 30 articles in the summer guide package on his own. No one made him use AI, but he wasn't going to produce 30 articles on deadline without a chatbot.

Amazon insists that it is treating AI as an assistant for its coders, but the actual working conditions make it clear that this is a reverse-centaur transformation. Scheiber discusses a dissident internal group at Amazon called Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, who link the company's use of AI to its carbon footprint. Beyond those climate concerns, these workers are treating AI as a labor issue.

Amazon's coders have been making tentative gestures of solidarity towards its blue-collar workforce since the pandemic broke out, walking out in support of striking warehouse workers (and getting fired for doing so):

https://pluralistic.net/2020/04/14/abolish-silicon-valley/#hang-together-hang-separately

But those firings haven't deterred Amazon's tech workers from making common cause with their comrades on the shop floor:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/19/deastroturfing/#real-power

When techies describe their experience of AI, it sometimes sounds like they're describing two completely different realities – and that's because they are. For workers with power and control, automation turns them into centaurs, who get to use AI tools to improve their work-lives. For workers whose power is waning, AI is a tool for reverse-centaurism, an electronic whip that pushes them to work at superhuman speeds. And when they fail, these workers become "moral crumple zones," absorbing the blame for the defective products their bosses pushed out in order to goose profits.

As ever, what a technology does pales in comparison to who it does it for and who it does it to.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/27/rancid-vibe-coding/#class-war

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[jlovescherry]

i feel the need to speak about a very important matter

lying about your identity to fool people and make them feel stupid is wrong and a bad thing to do

lying about your identity to protect yourself on the internet from the stalkers, creeps and weirdos, and just everything wrong about the internet, is normal and understandable

and it was three simple, stupid details. her name. her age (by two and a half years). and the state she lives in.

it's not like she revealed she's a 50 year old creep who uses chat gpt to make bots to be able to interact with young girls. she did it for her safety and her privacy.

feeling the need to be rude to her because she was lying and doesn't deserve kindness (i saw someone say this) is wrong and stupid and petty and immature. she was doing it to protect herself from being found and being stalked. it's one thing to be curious and ask questions, it's another thing to be mean

no one was personally affected by this. madeline exists, she is still kind, she is still creative, she is still friendly, she is still the person who has been running that blog for a year (ish). she is still the same person, just under a different name and two years younger

i don't understand why this turned into such a fuss about her being a liar, a traitor and whatnot. this should teach everyone that it's dangerous to put out stuff on social media because it can get into the hands of bad people with even worse intentions

i hope @cherriesnkisses is doing okay and that people will actually think about how someone knows too much about her personal life and is carelessly sharing the information with others, which is the real problem here

remember to always treat people with kindness

[daemyra-fire]

I find it curious how the girls who write stories have already found at least 30 different ways to save Nick and fix the end of the series 😂😂😂

So who in the Writing Room hated him enough to kill him off in such a stupid way? ,What happened? ,What did the character do to them? ,Who didn't like that people favored him? ,Why are they so attached to the fact that he was the bad guy?

It's absurd how inconsistent his death is with the Nick show they've shown for 5 and a half seasons, and even worse is that everyone in that room will agree to kill his arc in 3 pointless episodes, and then promote it in the worst way.

Chat GPT wrote the ending? Or what happened to them? Because I can't believe they're the same people who gave us the previous seasons and came up with this.

[myalgicencephalomyelitiscfstom]

Important new research from the Netherlands:

Skeletal muscle properties in long COVID and ME/CFS *differ* from those induced by bed rest

Chat GPT summary

"People with Long COVID and ME/CFS often experience severe fatigue, reduced ability to exercise, and post-exertional malaise (PEM) — meaning their symptoms get worse after even mild physical or mental effort. Because of this, they often avoid activity, which can lead to lower physical fitness.

To understand whether deconditioning (loss of fitness from inactivity) could explain their symptoms, researchers compared:

Healthy people who stayed in bed for 60 days (to simulate extreme inactivity), People with Long COVID or ME/CFS, And healthy people of similar age and sex.

They found:

Bed rest did reduce exercise ability and caused muscle shrinkage (atrophy) and lower oxygen use in muscles.

People with Long COVID and ME/CFS also had low exercise capacity, but they did not have muscle atrophy.

Instead, their muscles had fewer tiny blood vessels (capillaries) and were more reliant on anaerobic energy sources (glycolytic fibers) — changes not seen in the bed rest group.

Their breathing responses were also different during light or moderate activity, but not during intense exercise.

Conclusion: Even though both groups had low exercise capacity, the underlying causes were different. This means the problems in Long COVID and ME/CFS aren’t just due to being inactive — they reflect actual biological abnormalities, especially in how their muscles and circulation respond to effort."

[scomiller]

A letter to your dearest Joel -

After his death, you send a letter to Joel, hoping for a reply that will never come.

“Before, our letters expressed words left unsaid out of pride. But now, my letters express words left unsaid because, even if I overcome my pride and speak them, Joel will not hear. “

────────────୨ৎ──────────

My dearest Joel,

Life has been worse since you left.

I write this letter to tell you that the feeling of failure in my chest hasn’t gone away since I couldn’t save you — and it remains even stronger now, for not being able to help Ellie in her revenge against Abby.

Jackson has lost the vibrant color of its streets. The wind no longer passes softly, swaying the curtains of our window, because I no longer keep them open. Since I stopped hearing the strings of your guitar on the porch, I’ve come to prefer silence. Our home is no longer welcoming. Your jackets — the ones I sleep clinging to — are losing your scent.

Your boots haven’t left the doorstep; I still haven’t had the courage to move them. My heart remains hopeful that, suddenly, I won’t see them untouched on the cold floor, but rather on your feet, ready for another morning patrol with Tommy — from which you always returned laughing for no reason at your brother’s nonsense.

The bed remains unmade, because I feel as if the warmth of your body has somehow stayed in our blanket — the one your large frame pulled throughout the night, and I would snuggle against your chest to keep warm. I can almost hear your raspy voice at dawn, insisting it was unconscious, even if neither of us truly believed that. You needed me close just as I need you now.

Instinctively, I keep reaching out for your comfort, but all I find is your empty side of the mattress, sunken from years of use. When I try to play your guitar, I remember the moments we shared on the porch — the learning attempts, the laughter that slipped from you when you heard my out-of-tune symphony, and the soft smile that appeared when you heard me sing the song you taught me.

I begged you so many times to sing “Future Days” that your raspy voice repeats in my mind every night.

I long so much for your miraculous return that I still place a plate where you used to sit at the table when I make dinner. I still cook the same amount of food, even though now it’s just me. I can almost feel your presence and the clinking of silverware on your plate.

I long so much for your miraculous return that I still fold your clothes every morning, in case you’re called to help Maria with the construction plans.

I long so much for your miraculous return that even though I once said many times you and Tommy had nothing in common, now, I can see your eyes through his.

I’m aware of your absence in every breath, in every step, in every word…, because even Jackson’s blazing summer feels cold without you.

I no longer wait for your miraculous return, because now, I’m on my way to you.

────────────୨ৎ──────────

notes: I don’t know if someone will really see or read this until the end, but if you did… HEY! How are you? Iam Scomiller, i don’t know how tumblr works but I will try. English isn’t my first language, so, I wrote and asked Chat’s GPT grammar help. Im sorry if have errors, Im from Brazil! I really don’t know how tumblr works, but iam accepting help and request for more scenarios, Im not a good writer but it’s fun and I will try. Thanks so much!

[mythosidhesdollhouse]

Shibajuku Anime: Akira (Pt. 2 - The Review)

The nitty-gritty breakdown promised in Pt. 1. This post was an absolute drag to work on, but I'm glad to report I did at least find a few nice things to say. Precious few.

This is such a hilarious joke where do I even begin--

Alright friends and enemies, let's get this over with--

Cursory overview of the packaging: Forgot to take a closeup of the front before I removed her from the box, but it doesn't matter much since she's pretty accurate to the stock photos aside from her hair being several shades lighter than I was expecting (my first grievance).

Vague but threatening, bordering on nonsensical. Sounds like it was written by Chat GPT.

The array of blinding whiteness we discussed at length previously. (and no I will not collect you all, indeed I will be deeply shocked if the other three dolls in this line ever see the light of day)

Okay enough of that, let's get into the actual DOLL. For better or worse I am somewhat surprised to report this appears to be an entirely new sculpt. Not just the head, the body as well. The new one was clearly modeled after the original, but there are enough minor differences to convince me they made completely new molds for most if not all of the parts.

The face has the most obvious differences. The first thing I noticed when handling her is that the material Akira's head is made from is softer than Yoko's. Her cheeks are more rounded and less angular, her nose and mouth are smaller, and her eyes are smaller and more forward facing. The eye chips and lashes appear to be the same material that was used on the previous dolls, but the design of the iris and pupil have changed drastically, and combine with the overall revision of the makeup to give the new dolls what I suppose they thought was a more 'anime' look. Personally I prefer the wider, colored brows and glitter eyeshadow seen on Yoko, but I think Akira's stronger cheek blushing is an improvement on the old look.

The differences in the face sculpts are even more apparent in profile. Overall I think I actually prefer the new face. It's like a revised and updated version of the first draft we got on the original dolls.

Might as well drop a word about the hair while we're discussing the head. They appear to both have the same fiber--either very low end nylon or poly, I admit I'm not well versed enough to tell the difference--but Akira's rooting is much sparser than Yoko's.

At first glance not much to note about the new body appearance-wise, but upon closer examination we find the elbow and knee joints are cut differently, and the material(s) they are made from are not the same. While Yoko's entire body appears to be made from the same shiny hard vinyl throughout, Akira's torso and legs are made from a matte vinyl, while her hands and arms are rubbery and slightly pliable.

Akira's hands are smaller than Yoko's, and her arms are slightly slimmer.

Same hilariously tiny feet. If you check the backs of their knees you can see how the joints aren't quite the same.

Ok the sigh has returned. We're getting to the point that really bummed me out. You may have noticed the staining on Akira's arms in some of the earlier photos. Let's take a closer look.

The marks go all the way around on both arms. I suspect the blame for this lies in equal parts on the rubbery plastic her arms are made from, and the absolute shit material of her dress. OMG THIS EFFING DRESS. Sure it looks fine--Nice basic lolita silhouette, cute graphic elements, plenty of lace and ribbon trim--but the material it's made from is just nasty (and no not in a good way like Ms. Jackson). It's....crispy? Crunchy? Honestly the only way I can think to describe it is cheap, plasticky paper. It doesn't feel like fabric at all, and it's easily the worst tactile experience I can remember having with a doll garment. If you are sensitive to abrasive textures trust me you do not want to touch this thing. It made me physically cringe. And on top of all that unpleasantness, it's not even colorfast!

Her other pieces are fine. Shoes are fine, socks are fine, headband is actually better quality than anything else here and is the only thing that redeems the ensemble for me. With all her kit on Akira is decently cute enough to hang out with the other dolls I have on display at the moment, as long as I don't have to touch her.

Yoko's outfit is relatively simple by comparison, but it's made from NORMAL, soft, non-crunchy fabric, has some nice lace and metallic details on the skirt, and features the iconic Shibajuku cat socks, which are this brand's greatest (only) contribution to the wider doll community. Best of all, NO STAINS. Yoko has been wearing these pieces for eight, nine years? I've never bothered to redress her. Not a single mark on her. Call me crazy, but I'll happily take simplicity over a more elaborate design made with poor quality material that actively harms the doll.

That's it! I've run out of things to say. I got Akira with a $5 discount code Walmart sent me for posting a review of another doll, and I still feel like I overpaid. I don't hate her--you all know I love weird looking dolls, and for all their flaws I find these girls rather sweet (if derpy)--but I am just plain old mad at all the corners Hunter Toys obviously cut to make these dolls as cheaply as possible. It's an insult to their customers and their dolls.

[trickstarbrave]

I hate ppl using ai to write papers and being like “what’s even the problem???” What part of the paper writing process do you think is they important part. The end product??? No. The end product is just what is judged to figure out how well you were able to research, internalize, and build upon ideas. When you have chat gpt write your fucking paper you learned nothing. And if you are in college (many are) you are essentially wasting money. Like you are there to learn and not even doing that. Drop out and save money. And if you’re not in higher education and cant just drop out put that shit away and start actually fucking learning because I cannot deal with the brain dead takes and lack of ability to figure out what is a trustworthy source or not from other ppl anymore

“But I don’t want to it’s boring and I don’t care about it” life is often times a series of doing things that are boring or that you don’t rly care about to ensure your entire fucking life doesn’t fall apart. Very few people like doing laundry and washing dishes or brushing their teeth but if you don’t you have Major Problems. And if you don’t figure out how to use your own brain and think you are going to have even worse problems in life than rotted teeth and no dishes to eat off of

[nogacheloveka-blog]

The Bad Sanses somehow ended up in the Backrooms. №15

<-Switch to Russian ver.

next 16

prev 14

This is the translation of the another post from Russian to English. I understand English, but it is very difficult for me to write in English, so I asked chat GPT to help me. I have corrected some parts, but there still may be mistakes.

--------------------------------

Sometimes I notice that I don't spend enough time on all six characters, as I can't come up with a suitable activity or mini-plot for them. For example, poor Horror or Cross, whom I mention so rarely, *sigh*...

This part was half done even before I mentally broke down a bit, and I finished the rest just a today. I don't even remember where I planned to take the plot. So I'll just improvise.

I find it ironic that the story has stalled at a level where the characters are meant to wander for a long time. Here’s the original draft creation date on Tumblr, and here’s the publication date. So, it seems they’ve been wandering for about 7 months?

Thanks to @geno2108

--------------------------------

Killer wagered his body in a card game.

But it didn't have much effect. In the end, he reached for the bottles of alcohol in the mini-bar and managed to convince Dust and Horror to play cards with him. Cross refused but sat nearby, keeping an eye on the group. No one needed any new broken arcade machines. This place had already suffered enough.

Dust and Horror teamed up to win. But they overestimated the Killer: he was drinking shots too heavily and at some point passed out. He fell, knocking over bottles and a plate of snacks.

Well, he’s their prize, and Dust has plenty of colorful gel pens and markers in his pockets.

Cross was worried about what was on his face. It didn't bother him, but he felt foolish. The color wouldn't wash off (it was clearly getting brighter). It was uncomfortable. Was this normal for mushrooms? Some kind of natural dye like turmeric? Could natural dyes be this persistent? Maybe the mushroom had sprouted in the pores of Cross's bones? The swordsman nervously scratched under his eye socket, even though he didn't feel any itch. He had, of course, used Almond Water. But maybe he was only making it worse with the extra moisture?

Cross glanced at Dust. Even though they could use the local internet and had to update their notes less frequently, Cross and Dust continued to keep a notebook during their breaks (the internet was a luxury and not always available at their levels).

Since the day moths began to swirl around Dust, he had become calmer and more confident. Cross noticed that his hands no longer trembled when he wrote. And Dust no longer flinched from accidental touches, allowing them to sit close enough without unnecessary wariness (he had to get used to the feeling of insects on his bones).

Cross ran his hand over his face once more. Maybe not everything here is trying to kill or maim them?

During this time, Nightmare and Error were exploring the arcade machines. The others were useless in this activity, so they watched their games through their fingers. The main thing was to ensure that the mortals didn’t get in the way.

Nightmare didn’t want to be around his gang of kids when they were in a good mood. Error’s company was preferable: a lot of irritation, uncertainty, anger, and mental issues. Nightmare fed off them, and Error could fully concentrate on exploring the code. They both benefited.

Level 25 was a valuable place. Nightmare thought about taking it over and establishing himself there. If he could get the arcade machines to work, he could bring in the Smilers or Skin Stealers to scare away people (with particularly annoying ones, he could deal with them using his gang. Or personally).

It was frustrating that he couldn’t feed off the residents' distress when they realized such a useful place was no longer accessible to them. The liquid negativity was becoming scarcer as they moved forward. This made him feel weak, not like he used to be.

Error felt as if they were being manipulated. As if walls were being put up, forcing them to walk down a single correct path. Fine. Okay. Error would play along. And then he would kill the jester.

The killer dimension was probably clapping its hands happily, because if they found a suitable arcade machine, then—

The World Destroyer would try to fix it.

Is this a joke? Does he look like an idiot wit-h-h a paintbrush?

Let this stupid world create some kind of Behind-the-Scenes Sans and have fun with him.

S0 frus*rating. Destr0y it all t0 h3!!

Suddenly, he stumbled upon an arcade Tamagotchi. It made so little sense that it immediately caught his attention. The arcade led to Level 87, which was poorly explored by humans. Its code turned out to be open and quite simple. (Come on, I invite you.)

The damage to the casing wasn’t too severe — just a couple of broken buttons and a burn mark on the screen that looked like it came from a cigarette. People could fix it themselves if they wanted to.

Once the repairs were done, all that was left was to wait for the others, especially the Killer, who was scrubbing off marker drawings from his skull with vodka.

***

The new level greeted them with a boring straight corridor. Then a crossroad of boring straight corridors.

...

Then doors appeared.

...

Closed, open.

...

They led to boring straight corridors.

...

From time to time, there were supplies. And corpses.

...

And intersections of boring straight corridors.

.

.

.

There was nothing to explore here.

...

But then they ran into themselves.

Nightmare belongs to Jokublog Killer belongs to RahafWabas Dust belongs to Ask-DustTale Horror belongs to Sour-Apple-Studios Error belongs to CrayonQueen Cross belongs to JakeiArtwork

[apazwtsn]

i just indirectly called my friends stupid for using chat gpt because i mentioned that recent study that confirms that using it makes you more dumb right in the moment when they were asking for help because they didn't understand and i mean i knew what was gonna happen, what was i expecting???? they wouldn't say 'oohh thank you for telling me i'll stop using it!! i don't wanna be dumb anymore!!!!' OF COURSE they would not say that but i did it anyways and i'm feeling bad??? for what??? if i knew it would happen. if i said it anyways. if i didn't even think about it just said it and i'm now feeling bad like why would they be my friends???? if i know they have a low self steem and saying that would do nothing more than just ruining everything and making them feel even worse and i did it anyways. i'm just not a good friend and they're probably mad at me or worse, they're SAD and DISAPOINTED because i hurt them

[riflebrass]

There's a guy I know. He's kind of an annoying atheist. He doesn't get up in your face about being religious but he posts and shares a bunch of stuff crying about religion. Half the time it's about how he doesn't want Christians telling him what to do. The other half of the time it's ironically telling Christians what to do.

Anyway this guy keeps posting conversations he has with Chat GPT on facebook and I just can't take it seriously. I know we clown on reddit atheists a lot but this is so much worse. At least on Reddit you are talking to other people getting feedback from their real life experiences even if their logic is flawed. But this? A computer algorithm copying a ton of crap from reddit and passing it back to him like an original thought? And he is seriously acting like he's having a real conversation with a real person? And he wants this AI generated nonsense to preach philosophy to the rest of us? Get the fuck out lmao.

[no-stupid-questions-official]

Does anyone have any sources actually showing that c.ai causes a high amount of environmental harm? I've seen people say that but so far I haven't seen any actual sources for it. The only one I've seen sources given for is chat gpt, which runs off of different software (and also generates images and even videos, not just text). And when I researched it myself, while the carbon footprint c.ai has isn't great, it doesn't seem to be as horrifically bad as people are saying it is? In fact, several major social medias & sites, including tiktok, tumblr, reddit, pinterest, discord, instagram, and spotify all have noticeably worse carbon footprints than it shows to, and several of them, including tumblr, tiktok, reddit, pinterest, and spotify are not running off of sustainable energy, while c.ai does. So I'm confused where this information is coming from. For reference, the main website I used to find out the carbon footprint of websites is websitecarbon.com, and it does explain on it how it tests these things. And when looking into it further I even found a study showing that generative ai actually generally requires less power than human writing and illustration does (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10867074/). Which just made me very surprised (because I thought it was at least proven that certain things like chat gpt were more harmful for the environment) but also even more confused where this is coming from, because most people online talking about the problems with ai bring up environmental harm, and I don't think that idea came from nowhere. So I want to know if there are sources on it, and maybe I'm just failing to find them?

Additional note to avoid the comments devolving into assumptions, this is not me being pro generative ai. While I don't want to spread misinformation about it and make it out to be worse than it is when it comes to things like environmental harm, I am against it being used publicly or for any sort of profit since it 'creates' what it does by taking from people's creative work without their permission, whether that be monetary by shit like premium subscriptions and ad revenue on ai sites, or through attention by posting ai generated content, text, image, or auditory based, whether you are clarifying it's ai generated or not.

Sorry this question is very long, since it's already something I've done research into, I wanted to make sure it was clear what I have already looked at so I don't get answers that are repeats of what I already looked through.

-

[mamisbabygirl3]

AITA for being upset at my sister(21) because her nor her boyfriend(22) can clean up after themselves in the bathroom we all share?

ok so basically my sister still lives at home with me(14F)(don’t judge me for some of the stuff i A:make or B: post. Don’t anon bs me either.) and my parents and her boyfriend comes over a lot as well and uses our bathroom blah blah blah. Wouldn’t be a problem if both of them CLEANED UP AFTER THEMSELVES aka: putting the seat down, making sure p*b*c hair isn’t everywhere, making sure the stool i have in the shower isn’t covered in soap so when i almost faint in the shower i don’t get an infection from that,

so i brought it up to my sister this morning and she lost it. She screamed at me that i don’t clean up after myself either (i do) and that all that hair is mine (EVEN THO IT NOT) (like why the hell was that p*b*c hair on the door..? the mirror?? the sink?!?). So am I the asshole or nah?

edit: this isn’t the first time this has happen. every single time i try and bring something up she explodes at me.

edit: oh yeah and to make shit worse about the bf, HE USES AI FOR EVERYTHING!! (yes I am aware im a creator on c.ai.) BUT LIKE- ITS BAD. So this dumbass decided that he wanted the ‘free f slur pass’ (ykk.. the nono word for gay ppl. Idk if I can say it. I’m pan.) and my sister (who’s bi) was like ‘if you can tell me the cultural significance of this word, I’ll give you the pass.’ (bulllshittttt) SO THIS DUMBASS DECIDED TO ASK CHAT GPT AND NOT DO ACTUAL RESEARCH ON THE WORD. HE DIDNT EVEN READ THE WHOLE THING HE GOT IT SIMPLIFIED. GUYS HE WANTS TO BE A MEDIC WTF 😭😭😭

[coilgut]

question how did you (and wdym by) get help from chat gpt to find forums? like you know that ai is incredibly unreliable compared to a search engine and can get things wrong. the stuff you talked about in that post just sounded ai-generated and stuff. idk how anyone thinks miguel is the most stereotypical of the wgp racers when id argue its francesco who gets the most screentime and i guess just has more content on him being stereotypical. that and shu todoroki hes terribly stereotypical

Yup?? it's true that obv i used chat gpt for that i clarified it right there. But guess what? most of what i provided came from real forums/posts, pages that contained comments. Specifically about him, right? Saying about how stereotypical he seemed and aha, opinions. That’s different from just “making it up.”

“the stuff sounded AI-generated”

well yeah? Because it was summarized using AI…when i literally wrote “I did this with ChatGPT for funsies” at the top like:

Not only did i say it was AI-assisted, i said it before you even scrolled, bestie. U didn’t even read the first sentence correctly?

u right that the fact of using chat gpt may not be the best. Also, the whole “sounds AI-generated” accusation is so tired 😩 like sorry i used sentences and citations and didn’t just go “lol Miguel flamenco cringe.” sooo... Yeah, not much to say. Francesco honestly feels more like a pilot cliché than a cultural one, for me. It is a common type in F1. I did all this for funsies it's not like I'm actually serious saying "hey Miguel is stereotyped as hell 100% poorly done" nope, and that everything that he's stereotypical is serious; also no, he's one of my favorite wgp racers, he is beautifully pretty cool to me, and if you think Shu is a bad stereotype, alr that's just your opinion of him after all. I think he's "done well, ok, acceptable". Honestly, I don't find him stereotypical???

The way you, anon, tried to throw shade like:

“Uhh… you used AI so your entire opinion is invalid!!”

But u turned around and said: “Francesco and Shu are worse stereotypes anyway!!”

So you do believe in character stereotypes?

…Then why are you pressed when others believe Miguel fits that too? Like... be serious, be fr🫠

🍰AND THE ICING:

"idk how anyone thinks miguel is the most stereotypical..." OH? So now we can call characters stereotypical, but only the ones you think are??...Wow, so no one’s allowed to have a different POV than yours? Oh okay! So… Miguel isn’t stereotypical, but Francesco is because he’s loud and Italian, and Shu is too quiet and """dragon-ish"""?? Look. That’s literally what you were saying was unfair to claim about Miguel. Again, i never said Miguel was the most stereotypical... I said SOME people view him that way and i looked into it. But go off.

Bestie… you just admitted Francesco and Shu are stereotypical, meaning: you do understand that different people interpret characters differently. You admitted it’s subjective. You said Miguel seems stereotypical to some people.

Uhhh… maybe because some people do???And yes they do, i found texts from users treating him as a stereotype.

So like, congratulations! 🎉 You just invented… 🧠 Subjectivity 🧠

Welp, everyone has their own opinions about the cars characters, you too, no?. No one’s wrong, they’re all valid. It's hard to believe that someone doesn't think that or doesn't like one of them. All the racers can be considered stereotypes some less than others. They are not 100% perfect. Miguel Camino is a stereotype? Welcome to the concept of opinion, sweetie.

Using ChatGPT to find and summarize real forum comments and that was personally reviewed ≠ fake info. I said it was for funsies, i liked miguel, and i looked at forums. Calm down.

Stating “X character is stereotypical” = personal interpretation, not a threat to society

If you think Francesco or Shu are more stereotypical, cool! But guess what? That’s called… 🗣️✨an opinion✨🗣️

Which is exactly what you were questioning in the first place. Apparently the only valid stereotype is the one they personally decided on 😂

and.u are absolutely ok to complain about me using AI for this search. Very stupid of me lmao👍, completely agree with you on that, and sorry for making a text unnecessarily long for u💝Reading comprehension, zero.