Citation needed.

This is a New York Times article. By default, the New York Times is the citation, just like every other MSM. And even then, this specific article does attribute it:

To understand how this happened, The New York Times interviewed more than 40 current and former OpenAI employees — executives, safety engineers, researchers. Some of these people spoke with the company’s approval, and have been working to make ChatGPT safer. Others spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared losing their jobs.

Claude is trying to lick my ass clean every time I ask it a simple question

The article only said they made a test, not that they weren’t failing it, which happens to be what the linked paper says. This is not new as LLMs also always failed a certain intelligence test devised around that same time period until ~2024.

As soon as they found experts who were willing to say something else than “don’t make a chatbot”.

That’s 55%: https://humanfactors.jmir.org/2025/1/e71065

git packages are not supposed to be zip bombs

I agree that the manner this was presented at the 2013 Webbys, which kickstarted the debate, was jokingly, but the specifications have always recommended “jiff” since the format’s inception, though also a bit jokingly:

Wilhite and the team who developed the file format included in the technical specifications that the acronym was to be pronounced with a soft g. In the specifications, the team wrote that “choosy programmers choose … ‘jif’”, in homage to the peanut butter company Jif’s advertising slogan of “choosy moms choose Jif”.[3]

He was outed by Harvey Milk, more details are in the article or in what I quoted lol

Harvey Milk was a gay activism martyr and has in general an extremely positive image

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U3-RKTs1cY

who?

it’s also wrong™, but i think attraction is a complicated thing and unlikely to be extrinsically changed after it forms. not that the process of said formation is free from bigotry exposed to, but shaming people for certain attractions instead of, say, focusing on improving representation, inclusivity, and normalization in the environment is more likely to make them fodder and supporters for bigotry. though attraction biases are a symptom of bigotry, this is one of those cases imo where it’s much better to treat the cause over the symptom.

i know it’s satire. i’m wondering how genderqueer people would react to people sincerely saying that irl

the landing page mentions “your tongue has taste zones”. though on the other hand brontosauruses are real again

sorry if this is an offensive question by any chance, but how would you react to someone irl saying “There’s no poetry in a body that hasn’t been a site of transformation and reclamation. I find the unaltered, cisgender body to be lacking a certain history.”?

not me thinking this was serious and an interesting valid perspective 😭

jpeg xl has even less default support tho unless you use a mac

That same logic is how Aaron Swartz was cornered into suicide for scraping JSTOR, something widely agreed to be a bad idea by a wide range of lawspeople including SCOTUS in its 2021 decision Van Buren v. US that struck this interpretation off the books.

what about those who bought them for the “better than a gas-guggler” reason )plus some tech optimism and design allure maybe)?

maybe it’s because they think elf ears look cool. by they i meant me >:(

What’s the point?

Like @shit (from shitjustworks, nice one) said, these don’t conflict. While I didn’t say anything about authoritarian (communism especially vanguardism is authoritarian and it never works out), I personally believe that modern China is right wing. For example, their current government wants to merge traditional values with law.

Thank you for helping to spread Chinese, Soviet, and ableist propaganda. Plus you didn’t respond to that “probably” part.

I’m pretty sure you can’t just “delete” a subreddit

1. Probably ≠ all
2. Nope, if you do (after Deng for China, after Stalin for USSR, for other time periods you could be a leftist) and have extensively learned about it you probably think you’re a leftist but you’re actually a rightist. Think about how exactly the sum of their policies align with left values more than right values.