Reminds me a bit of an upside down panty hose.

Some people might find this shocking…. But a lot of knitting is already 3D. It’s not a very novel concept.

I am perfectly happy to discuss opposing viewpoints and potentially even be persuaded. Unless the opposing viewpoint can only be achieved with a complete lack of empathy and by not seeing other groups of people as people. Nothing either of us would say or do would change the other person’s opinion then. I can’t argue someone into believing that other people deserve basic human rights and dignity. They won’t convince me otherwise either.

I’ve noticed the same. I also find that I am way less susceptible to certain group dynamics than the average person seems to be. I don’t care about fitting in with the in-crowd or doing the thing everyone else is doing and the bystander effect seems to be nearly absent for me too.

I strongly suspect that those things are very related to neurodivergence in my case. My brain just brains differently.

You are still fighting a straw man here. Please point me to where I said all sports should be desegregated? It’s a very complicated issue and trying to segregate into 2 strict groups by sex at birth is a very messy, very imperfect solution. What some doctor thought was going on when they looked between a newborn’s legs is just not nearly as important as some other factors.

To give an example of a split I would be in favor of: Segregation based on factors relevant to the sport (like height and how far people can throw a ball for basketball). You can split into as many groups as needed and hey, if you’re right it’ll work out to an even gender split anyway, right? This just happens to be a way more inclusive way of doing things also avoids the weird situation of minors being harassed about their gender expression. Unless of course you want to specifically make people uncomfortable and want to exclude certain people. But that’s not the point you’re arguing, right?

Ok, fine. If you need a list here’s a list. Women excel in any type of endurance swimming, anything involving riding a horse, rhythmic gymnastics, figure skating, long distance running, shooting, archery, and sailing-sports.

Women and women’s teams also regularly beat men at: tennis, racing, soccer, basketball and wrestling (also highscool, college and Olympic-style amateur wrestling, not just the scripted WWE theatre thing). Want sources for all of those? Because I’ve got all of them.

I’m not wanting to “require mixed gender teams”, but I do feel like there are many better options out there than strict gender or “sex at birth” based segregation. Especially since we know nowadays that sex at birth has so many more than 2 categories and gender is a spectrum. I’m sick and tired of people of many different genders (and especially women) being victimized for the sake of “protecting women”. And I have sources for that too.

The idea that women need “protection” from competing with men was always more about control than it ever was about fairness. The argument of women somehow being physically worse at sports is just not accurate in many cases. Actually there are a lot of sports in which women have an inherent advantage over men.

Yes, men on average have higher bone density, greater muscle mass and larger lung capacity. However women tend to on average have a more efficient fat metabolism, better cold tolerance, a lower center of gravity, higher flexibility and more stable fine motor control. Also some people tend to beat the odds and win despite supposedly being at a disadvantage.

I am not sure if you have discussed AI in a room full of hackers recently, lol. I have. Maybe 1/100 is pro-Generative AI in my estimation:

I just wish work didn’t force me to take a front seat and interact with MS products anyway.

Don’t give them ideas…

And simultaneously half as attractive.

I don’t think that there’s more assholes than decent people. I think the assholes just stick out more.

Hey, they chose to offer free labor for a company that has proven time and time again to not give a crap about the mods or the users. I get why they are complaining but I at least hope that they aren’t surprised or expect that their complaints will do anything.

Of course he did. The ones he’s been found guilty of at least. But with how much he doesn’t want the files out there’s definitely some extra ones in there.

Were they though? If that was sarcasm I really don’t think it translated well into text at all.

Fair.

Water use comes out to about 150.000 chatGPT queries per quarter pounder. Using 10ml per prompt and 15.000l per kg of beef.

Still off by many orders of magnitude.

Also that’s just the running costs. If we go into training we’re looking at a comparison the other way around. Training GPT-3 cost 700.000 liters of water. So that’s 466.6 quarter pounders.

I mean, yes there are other ways to be intimate with each other than penetration. However as far as I can tell a lot of men are very attached to the idea of penetration when it comes to sex. I would assume it would feel quite debilitating not to have the option when you really want to have the option. Then again what do I know. I am missing the necessary parts to know what any of that feels like from the male side.

Yeah, I might have seen the same interview. I just didn’t want to put the relevant words into a search engine to figure out specifically what I was vaguely remembering.

I did a quick calculation and got to around 500 queries per quarter pounder. Lot of guesstimation and rounding though, but I’m pretty sure I got close enough to know that you’re off by quite a lot.

Edit to add: I used 21.9kg CO2 per 1kg of beef and 4.32 grams per ChatGPT query for my rough estimate.

However that 4.32 number is already over a year old. Chances are it’s way outdated but everyone still keeps on quoting it. It definitely does not take into account that ChatGPT often “thinks” now, because chain of thought is likely as expensive as multiple queries by itself. Additionally the models are more advanced than a year ago, but also more costly and that CO2 amount everyone keeps quoting doesn’t even mention which model they used. If anyone can find the original source of this number I’d be very curious.

So when people tell you about the positive changes they’ve made you in return like to point out that they still aren’t living up to your standards? I’m not sure that’s the way to go to motivate and inspire people to do better. But you do you I guess.