Affidavit

I used to pay for 4 streaming subscriptions.

Now no one gets my money. I would love to support developers, but I'm unwilling to put up with this bullshit to do so.

Ads even though I already pay? Have to turn off my VPN to use your website? Incomplete series? Inability to watch content offline? Regularly increase the cost well above inflation level? Geolocking content?

Streaming services get shittier and shittier with each passing day. Glad I 'opted out'.

Here's my first attempt at that prompt using OpenAI's ChatGPT4. I tested the same prompt using other models as well, (e.g. Llama and Wizard), both gave legitimate responses in the first attempt.

I get that it's currently 'in' to dis AI, but frankly, it's pretty disingenuous how every other post about AI I see is blatant misinformation.

Does AI hallucinate? Hell yes. It makes up shit all the time. Are the responses overly cautious? I'd say they are, but nowhere near as much as people claim. LLMs can be a useful tool. Trusting them blindly would be foolish, but I sincerely doubt that the response you linked was unbiased, either by previous prompts or numerous attempts to 'reroll' the response until you got something you wanted to build your own narrative.

Can't help but notice that you've cropped out your prompt.

Played around a bit, and it seems the only way to get a response like yours is to specifically ask for it.

Honestly, I'm getting pretty sick of these low-effort misinformation posts about LLMs.

LLMs aren't perfect, but the amount of nonsensical trash 'gotchas' out there is really annoying.

I've been humming and harring about whether to block this community over the past week, but the sheer orangeness of your post has me convinced. Orange is the best.

I will remain for now.

Edit: do you usually keep your salt and pepper shakers on the stove???

Sorry for the delayed response, it took me a while to do the calculations but I finally figured it out:

It's magic.

I hope this helps.

Ah, that is not how your initial comment came across. Though I guess you realise that now.

I honestly don't recall ever encountering any bars on buying video games as a kid, or even knowing that ratings existed, though it could just be because my parents bought most of my games. I think you're right that very few people in Australia care about ratings. To me, it's clear that ratings are almost entirely arbitrary. It's obvious that big developers get more leeway in how their products are rated than smaller developers anyway.

It's probably the website geoblocking content and OP is not at fault for posting a low-value article as I initially thought; my bad. I don't want to disincentive people posting legitimate content, so my previous comment was uncalled for.

Edit: it’s both extremely telling and extremely concerning how much my rational take on consent is triggering all these pathetic men.

Your initial comment was rational, it was well-thought out and you made a fair point while ending the comment on a positive note. Left alone, I would have upvoted your well-considered opinion and moved on.

However, your follow up responses and your edit were unprovoked ad hominem sexist attacks where you assume everyone who disagrees is a mansplaining penis-wielder whose words have less value than your own. While having your views challenged can be confronting, responding in the manner you are only detracts from your argument.

Huh. I run a LLM locally on my own machine. Not looking forward to my next water bill.

Click on link. See no video. Close link.

Stop wasting my time.

Edit: Please disregard my comment OP, not your fault. As per below comment, it looks like the mentioned video is there, the website likely has geoblocking restrictions.

Australians do. As do international companies selling to the Australian market.

The title is presumptuous and does not encourage a healthy debate.

Historically, etymologically, are bivalves vegan? No, they are obviously not. But are you vegan because you are a linguist? Or are you vegan because you want to minimise the harm that you cause while continuing to live and thrive as a moral person? Limiting veganism to simplistic, poorly considered ideas such as what kingdom of organism they fall into is lazy and ill-considered. Like every other word in the English language, veganism is not bound to its original meaning.

I researched bivalves some time ago and decided, personally, that there just wasn't enough information (that I could interpret) available to me to determine whether they experienced pain, suffering, or any form of higher thought process. I decided that I would refrain from eating bivalves, as I just wasn't sure.

However, there are plants out there that are more sophisticated, and seemingly more intelligent, than organisms in the Animalia kingdom (e.g. most jellyfish).

I don't eat bivalves because I am unsure. I don't eat jellyfish because they taste like nothing. I don't eat honey, because bees clearly have some level of sentience. Idgaf about what some person in 1944 decided as the meaning of the word 'vegan' (though I respect the intent).

Many of the comments in this thread are criticising solely on the etymological basis of the word 'vegan' rather than the actual ethical consideration of the issue.

The question for these people, 'are you vegan because you genuinely care about the impact you have, or do you care more about rigid definitions with little consideration of the actual meaning?'