I don't necessarily think you have to get on board with a party. In some ways, I understand the plight. A lot of politics caters to the rich, and if we have a two party system and they both show disdain for you, it feels like that's it. However, a lot of party politics can be done at a local level, and while that is a generic answer, it is the answer. You can change your local party to cater to you because you make up a bigger proportion, and you can get your neighbors on board too. Show up and question your local politicians and they will be forced to change or they can be replaced.
It's a boring answer, but it's unfortunately what you have. Focusing on the big politics isn't feasible.
But that's exactly how an LLM is trained. It doesn't know how words are spelled because words are turned into numbers and processed. But it does know when its dataset has multiple correlations for something. Specifically, people spell out words, so it will regurgitate to you how to spell strawberry, but it can't count letters because that's not a thing that language models do.
Generative AI and LLMs are just giant reconstruction bots that take all the data they have and reconstruct something. That's literally what they do.
Like, without knowing what your answer is for assassin, I will assume that your issue is that the question is probably "How many asses are in assassin?" But, like, that's a joke. Assassins only has one ass, just like the rest of us. That's a joke. And nobody would ever spell assassin as assin, so why would it learn that there are two asses in assassin?
I'm confused where you are getting your information from, but this is not particularly special behavior.
Actually, the Rs issue is funny because it WAS trained on that exact information which is why it says strawberry has two Rs, so it's actually more proof that it only knows what it has been given data on. The thing is, when people misspelled strawberry as "strawbery", then naturally, people respond, " Strawberry has two Rs." The problem is that LLM learning has no concept of context because it isn't learning anything. The reinforcement mechanism is what the majority of its data tells it. It regurgitates that strawberry has two Rs because it has been reinforced by its dataset.
You either have an illegal but very popular activity run by "the black market", or a legal but very popular activity run by the government and capitalists.
Right there.
Still didn't answer mine yet, though. I apologize for being inconvenient and remembering things you don't.
Please point out where I said it would stop black market gambling. Please do. I have unlimited time, and you have unlimited disappointment to give me.
I said that black market gambling is STILL A THING, so your point that making it legal is somehow stopping it is wrong, and obviously so because that's how words work, pal. So, anyway, please feel free to revive my brain with your refutation because I so carelessly didn't say the thing you said I said.
You know you can make gambling against the law by going after the brokers and not the betters, right? Gambling destroys lives and pretending that legalization is the only thing stopping black market gambling is brain dead.
It's telling that you blame control for why more people are betting because anyone that studies addiction would tell you you're a fucking moron, and I think you should remind yourself of that fact on an hourly basis, because you have only one idea for banning gambling. Consider that banning gambling by going after brokers is going after those that profit from the whole thing, and you'll realize that, woah, it will have a positive effect.
Just gotta generate some more means to divide ourselves!
Yeah, idk, man, those guys that infiltrated leftist groups were fucking stupid and were easily picked out because they were morons that didn't understand why people were leftist. But, sure, you gotta gatekeep to stop those idiots, lol.
I think it is. To say that you need to perform some arbitrary action or have some arbitrary prerequisite to be a member of a belief structure is silly. I see it as simply being that you are a leftist if you have leftist ideals. Like, you can argue about the applicability of communist vs anarchist vs socialist, because those relate to organizational structures, but to say you can't label yourself as a leftist for a reason that isn't really related to being a leftist is just moral gatekeeeping.
Right. I think it'd be great if they have that drive. But some of them won't. And I don't see them as not a leftist just because they don't. And I especially don't see it as harmful to me if they identify as such. The label isn't mine to dole out.
Yes, I understand that you think that. I also don't agree with you. I think you are gate keeping a term.
Like, if I want to dismantle hierarchical structures that oppress me and all that jazz, but I know jackshit about class because I don't read or participate because I just gotta work my day job day in and day out, am I not a leftist? I don't think the answer is no. Now, I wouldn't trust a person like that to make good decisions in forwarding or explaining leftist ideas, but... They're not the problem. I don't even care if they call themselves a leftist because they're not contributing the problems. Like... This feels like a fake problem.
To me, I don't think it's possible for everyone to be knowledgeable about the things they believe in. I think it'd be great if they were, but it's not always a great starting point for everyone, and if a stoner bro wants to call them self a leftist, ain't no skin off my back. Anyone that was going to use that guy as baggage against me was going to also use sex workers and unhoused people and gay people and trans people and furries and anyone else that's seen as undesirable. I just don't give a fuck, man.
Yeah, no, I heard you the first time. I just don't get why you give a fuck. They're not doing anything negative, so who fucking cares what the call themselves?
Which ones were these "progressives"? Because I very much think that anyone running anything was self-proclaimed moderate at best.
But, considering that you wanted Trump to win anyway, I'm pretty sure you're just a fucking loser with zero idea of what you're talking about.