💜 Cynni 🏳️🌈 likes this.
reshared this
Patrick Hadfield, ReneDamkot, Pim Joosten 🍉, Tim Chambers, 💜 Cynni 🏳️🌈, Velocipede Rider, Natasha Jay 🇪🇺, Scimmia di Mare, Tim McTuffty and cb2k20 reshared this.
like this
Mark, Jacob Urlich 🌍, Joseph and Hypolite Petovan like this.
reshared this
Grutjes, Jurjen Heeck 🍋, Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩, Debbie Goldsmith 🏳️⚧️♾️🇺🇦, Mark, Ted van Geest, Ciara, Jacob Urlich 🌍, Paul Sutton, Liam Proven, stux⚡, Eugen Rochko, Black Aziz Anansi, Kim Possible, wauz ワウズ, cb2k20, KaKetelmug and Dallman Ross reshared this.
in the early 2000s, my mom was sending me nonsense emails and I was replying with snopes links. In the 2010s, that basically changed to her posting nonsense on Facebook.
So many people don't bother fact checking at all.
it´s like people believe what they see in advertisting and take that as information....
also your post reminded me of people who were annoyed when they had to wash hands because of covid. and I was really shocked that this seemed something new to them.
What also worries me is that Chatbots give different answers when you ask the same question in different languages. Even the sources GPT mentioned were different.
There is really no I in AI.
a person very close to me doesn't trust Wikipedia because "anybody can write there" (in spite of it being one of the few big multi-party curated media), but will happily take as truth any random conspiracy theory someone relays on social media, even if it doesn't make any sense at all once you apply a drop of logic to it...
e.g.: fakenews.pl/en/environment/rai…
Rainforest Alliance, atrazine, and Bill Gates. We verify the narratives around the green frog logo - Fakenews.pl
The Rainforest Alliance logo on food products has been causing strong emotions among conspiracy theorists for a long time. The organization has beenMateusz Zadroga (Foundation "Counteracting Disinformation")
Yeah that makes sense.
By the way who is still depending on ChatGPT for search results?
I was looking for the XRPokeFilter class, but the eagerness to invent stuff on the fly unnerves me. I'll review every line of code it provides.
Sane humans won't win against this firehose.
All the #AI haters out there, note what this post says: that humans who fail to use their intellect and uncritically rely on *any* #technology to think for them are hallucinating themselves, doesn't matter if it's #ChatGPT or a #Google search or the conspiracy theory your uncle posted on #Facebook.
If you or someone you know have ever started a sentence "On TikTok..." then the robots have already taken over your/their brain and I couldn't care less what you think about AI! @pheonix
P.S. You're on Reddit!
It caught our attention because you used Publer to share this masterpiece.
And its not like its made any information any more accessible. If something wasn't already readily available by Web search (even if you had to know where to look) then it's not going to be available to ChatGPT (or any other LLM, for that matter).
It doesn't even list sources (like Wikipedia, or most good bloggers) so there's no way to know where it's getting the information when it gives you something wild.
And the time 'saved' by not doing one's own reading is probably not going to be helpful, especially if it's spent having to undo the problems that relying too much on ChatGPT caused.
(With that being said, there's also a lot of fantastic sources on all sorts of subjects that have either vanished from the Web, been deliberately removed - either by creators or through copyright strikes and the like - or have vanished behind paywalls. And that seems to have been happening more and more. Not sure why, maybe it's just me noticing it, but - on some topics it's definitely gotten more difficult to fact check unless you've got a good base of (saved or off-line) resources already.)
one time in a sociology class (about 20 years ago), someone brought in a printout of a website that claimed that there had been a successful male pregnancy by transplanting a uterus. It had a bunch of fake citations and everything. Even the teacher concluded it was probably real, there were only a couple of us pointing out that anyone could make a web page that said anything.
It's only gotten worse since then
Once when pointing out to a Facebook friend that a political post they shared contained false info, they replied that it didn't matter because it made Trump look bad.
Unrelated, I no longer use Facebook.
Actually, you don't have to "fact check" everything.
Depending upon what you use it for, eg do you distribute it, or just as and additional info.
In many cases it's also okay to only sanity check things. Especially to invalidate something.
But yes, taking some random post at face value without researching it is naive.
reading all the comments here, i thin i should be happy that my parents did never started to use "the internet"
But some newspaper-like publications and TV programmes are not better
Just the other day I had a lil debate with someone who it then turned out had used ChatGPT for their claim...
masto.ai/@Carnivius/1147766353…
Carnivius (@Carnivius@masto.ai)
Attached: 3 images Arguing facts with someone and then they just happen to mention they use chatgpt as their source of their (proven wrong) claim (it gave them results from 2023 and we're discussing 2024) and ugh, this is what we gotta deal with the…Mastodon
sadly true. And kind of anticipated; even in the 1980s, there were issues with people thinking of computers as basically infallible. Both Hackers and The Net even used this tendency to overly trust what’s on a computer as plot points; those were released in 1995, reflecting on tendencies that already existed becoming more problematic as computing became more widely adopted.
GeePawHill
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •The great Cecil Adams, in his Straight Dope column, once offered an aside on an entirely different topic, saying (paraphrase) "I know this the same way I know the toilet paper goes over the roll towards you. Don't ask me how I know. I just know."
Words to live by.
Michael Jessopp
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •mullets != cool
Joachim Ziebs
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Su_G
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Toni M.
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •It does not indicate on which side the wall is, is it?
😂
CienfrasesMP
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Toni M.
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •But definitely a milestone in the history of civilization.
🤣
Zekovski 🍂
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Syralicious (🔜39C3 ☎️7972)
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Abu Daniyal
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sepia Fan
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sebastian Herold
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •mbpaz
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Nina Kalinina
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Wrapping or tolier paper roll
patents.google.comReindeR Rustema
in reply to Nina Kalinina • • •Natasha Jay 🇪🇺
in reply to ReindeR Rustema • • •I have that one too.
But thank you ... indeed!
@nina_kali_nina
Supermoosie
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Patent Expired.
So does not apply.
Doing it my own way.
Marco Ivaldi
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •DreyStone
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •@anneroth
My cats totally agree. This is the way to go. #Meow
asTra
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •distincte&clare
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Markus Werle
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sir Toootenstein
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •xs4me2
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Martin #ichbinnichtneutral
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Martin #ichbinnichtneutral
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sérgio Machado
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Lupino
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •John "John Davies" Davies ☑️
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Hugs4friends ♾🇺🇦 🇵🇸😷
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sensitive content
Anja
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •StuartB
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Things get improved over time, and eventually do things in a completely different way.
In this case, loo roll has been improved by mounting it in a more aesthetically pleasing configuration... 😁
Johan Diederik
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Madness832
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •C.S.Strowbridge
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •�
in reply to C.S.Strowbridge • • •Rob van Kan🔻
in reply to � • • •@utf_7 @csstrowbridge So now we have
1) no reasons to hang it facing the room
but
2) three reasons to hang it facing the wall:
2a) cats
2b) toddlers
2c) the wind (see my reply to the op)
�
in reply to Rob van Kan🔻 • • •this is how argumentation works :D
edit: when i try hard, only argument against wall side might be bad wall color, so that it could crock. then the paper would paint your ass.
Rob van Kan🔻
in reply to � • • •�
in reply to Rob van Kan🔻 • • •berlin_radler
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Ulrich Best
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Ellen S.
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Checkmate.
Nae King! Nae quin! Nae Laird!
in reply to Ellen S. • •Leeloo
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •I never had any doubt. When I was a child my parents had a toilet roll holder which would automatically grip the roll so you could easily tear it off with one hand.
The gripping mechanism only worked the right way around, so I've always been used to the right way being the only way.
Fionor
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •There is no wrong way. Plenty of patents evolved over time and whatever their inventors intended no longer matters.
It's more important to use it than how you hang it.
Nae King! Nae quin! Nae Laird!
in reply to Fionor • •I hope the paper they're using has got better!
SteveTarter
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •But go ahead and hang it how you want. I assume you don't have cats, or don't mind periodic piles of TP under the dispenser...
atlovato
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Rob van Kan🔻
in reply to atlovato • • •You see, aerodynamics doesn't care about your silly religion.
ℒӱḏɩę 💾☮∞🎶♲☀🔋
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Tim Ward ⭐🇪🇺🔶 #FBPE
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Matt
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Jugger1511
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Lupino
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Nic3
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Thomas Guyot-Sionnest
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •I hear some people voluntarily reverse it to see who will mansplain them the fine art of replacing a toilet paper roll, or just sneakily reverse it 😂
Also whoever wrote this patent doesn't have cats!
Boab
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •blaue_Fledermaus
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •ren (a they/them) 🎶🌈
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •So Seth didn’t have cats?
Why would you trust a non-cat owner?
Erwan 🚄
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Gareth Kitchener
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Sjaak K. 🇳🇱🇪🇺🐸
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •🐌’s Pace
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Being validated feels so good!
Paul Gill Rider 🏴🏳️🌈🇺🇦
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Lauren 🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈🇨🇦
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Voracious Reader
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Now you've got me yelling at this Mastodon post: 😡
mastodon.social/@paulrickards/…
paulrickards (@paulrickards@mastodon.social)
MastodonVoracious Reader
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •What about the toilet paper emoji?
🧻
Have they cleverly avoided the issue by placing the axis vertically, or have they just opened another rift in society by unrolling from the right 😱 when "everyone" knows that it MUST be unrolled from the left?
E-TARD The LifeCaster
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Melroy van den Berg
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Bill Reese
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Admiral Memo
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Chuck
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Frank
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •JuneSim63 💚
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Georg Bloemen
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •severino
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Jonas
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Ethan Black
in reply to Natasha Jay 🇪🇺 • • •Toilet paper dilemma
Stack Overflow