I’ll never understand the mentality of people who confidently yap about things that they don’t even have a basic understanding of. Iran didn’t fund ISIS, they are the ones who defeated it. ISIS was trying to destroy Assads government (Iranian ally), why would Iran fund them.
Seriously impressive level of ignorance and hubris on display here.
No. It's because she has been frozen out by the Trump admin for weeks now - as was seen with the fact that she was not invited to the Camp David but the other Intel heads were to discuss the Iran crisis when Netanyahu informed the admin about the then imminent strikes [0] - and the role of DNI is itself on the chopping block to be merged as part of Project 2025 (one of the few things I agree with them about - the DNI is a redundant role that was only developed during 9/11, and has been made redundant by the NSC and fusion centers).
I liked the article and think it contains some good insights, but there are a few things that left a bad taste in my mouth, and prevented me from fully connecting with the argument being made.
First, there are some platitudes or outright stereotypes that are presented as profound insights, e.g. “men do not connect emotionally as well as women”. Whether this is or is not true is up for debate in the first place, but either way, it’s hardly a novel or interesting statement. Discussing the causal relationships that yield this emergent phenomena, and using that to synthesize a solution, is far more interesting.
Second, these issues primarily affect lower or middle class men and boys. There’s just something off-putting about an Ivy League-educated lawyer and politician, who is not a man, writing op eds about men’s issues and how to address them. Like… what exactly makes her think that she would have any valuable insight that’s not inherently obvious to the median American male? Cynically, I think it may be good for us to have women spearheading this, because it’s politically incorrect for men to raise these issues. That right there illustrates one of the central cultural illnesses that is resulting in the enshittification of men.
But most of all, I find it patronizing that this piece refuses to acknowledge that men have legitimate complaints in some respects. Eg during my undergrad, there was a TA room where students could go for help on CS projects. There was almost always a line down the hall because of the popularity of the major. However, female CS students had their own special TA room, with an equal number of TAs, despite women making up like 10% of the major. For another example, look at the female-exclusive career fairs and resulting employment opportunities, like at GHC. Men and boys see this stuff in front of their face all the time. They know it’s not fair. It’s obvious that it’s not fair. But nobody wants to say it, because you’ll be labeled as all sorts of horrible things. That is emblematic of the core, central issues in our modern gender roles and expectations as they relate to men. And I hate to say it, but IME, these harmful attitudes towards men are primarily perpetuated by women (in particular, the very-online crowd)
You are correct. The fact that so many people are saying “lol just train it on text about the game bro” reveals how little people understand how these models work, how they are trained, etc.
You don't, for example, expect some ordinary farmer or tramp in the game world to know a lot about the (in-game) world or be capable of doing deep conversations about complicated topics.
So I don't think the necessary amount of text that you need to train the AI on is as insanely large as you imagine (but of course nevertheless a lot of texts have to be written - this is the price of having "much more dynamic" AI characters in the game).
Except that robotics technology is completely different from LLMs? Comments of this flavor are such a tell that the commenter has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about.
This was true up until pretty recently. CS has come to be seen as a “prestigious” degree, and SWE as a “prestigious” career. Lots of kids who, 10 years ago, would have studied law, medicine, finance, or hard sciences, are studying CS. At my alma mater, CS is the largest major by a huge margin.
The result of all this is there is a massive supply of smart and capable American citizens with formal training trying to break in to the job market, with limited success, due in no small part to the labor oversupply caused by immigration.
I mostly agree with you, but i think there’s something you got wrong. The democrat establishment didn’t abdicate their pro-labor position for reasons of racial equity- this was only ever a cover story.
The real reason is that they are totally beholden to powerful business interests that benefit from mass immigration, and the ensuing suppression of American labor movements. The racial equity bit is just the line that they feed to their voters.
I’ll never understand the mentality of people who confidently yap about things that they don’t even have a basic understanding of. Iran didn’t fund ISIS, they are the ones who defeated it. ISIS was trying to destroy Assads government (Iranian ally), why would Iran fund them.
Seriously impressive level of ignorance and hubris on display here.