kozuneartz

[kozuneartz]

[kozuneartz]

it’s for you!

[kozuneartz]

wizard who's too lazy to name things properly and so can't ever find the incantation she's looking for bc her spellbook is full of spells called shit like 'aaaa1' and 'asdfghjk'

[kozuneartz]

internet politics and real-world politics have gotten so separated, and pretty soon all this internet weirdness is gonna come crashing into real life and politicians are gonna start throwing around words like “SJW” and “anime communist” and “dark enlightenment” and it’s just gonna be the most ridiculous fucking thing

[kozuneartz]

some of my favorite woven tapestries, by Cecilia Blomberg:

Point Defiance Steps

Mates

Rising Tides

Vashon Steps

[kozuneartz]

I’ve always found it insane how a tactic to “help” people with addiction is to threaten to revoke your support from them like do you really think you can ultimatum someone out of a disease. Do you think if you tell someone with bipolar you’re deleting their name out of your contacts they’ll snap out of a manic episode like the people in snickers commercials after they get a candy bar

[kozuneartz]

Sometimes you need to read something twice to get it. You might need to watch a movie three times to understand it. You might have to have that album on repeat for a week until the lyrics make any sense. You're allowed to engage with it and can keep engaging with it until it means something to you. People will see a painting at a museum and laugh about not getting what the big deal is but like you can come back, you can see it at another time, and maybe that next time it'll be different for you. I'm of the belief the "media literacy crisis" would solve itself if more people just sat down and did it again. Watched, read, played, listened, etc like I don't think people are getting more ignorant necessarily I just think we're not glorifying personally replaying things nearly as much as we should be.

[kozuneartz]

choose your fav puppy

[kozuneartz]

There's a post sitting in my flagged posts that's been there for three plus years. It's a pair of onions in a bag that looks suspiciously like a pair of fat tits. Apparently it's flagged for everyone and God i wish i could show y'all

[kozuneartz]

But then again, a lot of women’s fashion is women dressing for women. Which is superb. And it’s always been that way. The poke bonnet, large bustles and hoop skirts. Men hated those things so much they made comics about them in the newspaper and women liked them so they kept wearing them. To this day you see the phenomenon in women’s comments sections where a woman will show her outfit or makeup and all the women will cheer her on and there will be straight men like “You look like shit and no man likes that.” and she’ll be like “Awesome. Fuck you. I’m dressing for my friends, not you.”

The problem is that straight men will dress for other straight men and get angry women do not find it attractive. Women will dress for other women and be happy another woman paid her a compliment and not be sobbing and rolling around at the thought men don’t find her huge eyeliner sexy. Men will go out of their way to say “You’re never getting a man looking like that. Dudes hate unnatural hair colors and tattoos and piercings.” under a lesbian’s post. A woman posts a picture of her with her boyfriend and there are rabid incel gymbros in the comments like “Why is this ugly dude getting bitches and I can’t get laid???” Probably because you aren’t listening to women and don’t care what they think or want.

[kozuneartz]

Hey, don’t cry. Free online database of Japanese folk lore

[kozuneartz]

The problem here isn’t that large language models hallucinate, lie, or misrepresent the world in some way. It’s that they are not designed to represent the world at all; instead, they are designed to convey convincing lines of text. So when they are provided with a database of some sort, they use this, in one way or another, to make their responses more convincing. But they are not in any real way attempting to convey or transmit the information in the database. As Chirag Shah and Emily Bender put it: “Nothing in the design of language models (whose training task is to predict words given context) is actually designed to handle arithmetic, temporal reasoning, etc. To the extent that they sometimes get the right answer to such questions is only because they happened to synthesize relevant strings out of what was in their training data. No reasoning is involved […] Similarly, language models are prone to making stuff up […] because they are not designed to express some underlying set of information in natural language; they are only manipulating the form of language” (Shah & Bender, 2022). These models aren’t designed to transmit information, so we shouldn’t be too surprised when their assertions turn out to be false.

ChatGPT is bullshit

[kozuneartz]

[kozuneartz]

[kozuneartz]

current mantra

[kozuneartz]

I think sometimes people think eugenics is bad but its still true, like thinking that if people with certain traits have children it will change society for better or worse based upon what traits are promoted. I think its important to emphasize that eugenics is not only wrong morally it's also fake and stupid bullshit

Like eugenics was supposed to be based on the idea that "If it works with animals to select only the best ones to breed, why wouldn't it work with humans?"

well it doesn't work with animals, that's the thing. applying the eugenics ideas to domestic breeds of animals hasn't made better animals it's just made animals with more extreme expression of certain traits. turns out that when you decide which traits are the "best" and become obsessed with the genetic purity of the animals that have the "best" traits, you might well end up with some sad suffering creature like a Pug, or the Persian cats with the smashed faces that are in constant pain because their teeth and airways and brains are getting crushed by their skulls, or those meat chickens that grow so fast they can hardly even stand up after a few weeks old, or inbred race horses with tiny feet and fragile toothpick legs

like almost all traits are neither "good" or "bad" they're way more complex than that. a long tail or a long snout or a stubborn, independent personality can be good or bad depending on the situation. Who gets to decide what is a "good" trait or a "bad" trait? It's arbitrary and selecting for traits that are "good" in your opinion will often have both "good" and "bad" outcomes because the "good" and "bad" are part of each other and not separate its just part of being alive

Obviously oversimplifying everything but you get it. we did eugenics with dogs and how did that go? not very well

[kozuneartz]

Imo, christians would have an easier time with the trinity if they described it as like, “my god has three faces” or “jesus is the feet on the earth, the spirit the hands, and god the head” instead of restating polytheism verbatim

We should have a gathering in a place called Nicaea and have this discussion with the various Church leaders, cause I think you're on to something