Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful youāll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutānāpaste it into its own post ā thereās no quota for posting and the bar really isnāt that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned soo many āesotericā right wing freaks, but thereās no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iām talking redscare-ish, reality challenged āculture criticsā who write about everything but understand nothing. Iām talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyāre inescapable at this point, yet I donāt see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnāt be surgeons because they didnāt believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canāt escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)
Donāt know how much this fits the community, as you use a lot of terms Iām not inherently familiar with (is there a āwelcome guideā of some sort somewhere I missed).
Anyway, Wikipedia moderators are now realizing that LLMs are causing problems for them, but they are very careful to not smack the beehive:
I justā¦ donāt have words for how bad this is going to go. How much work this will inevitably be. At least weāll get a real world example of just how many guardrails are actually needed to make LLM text āworkā for this sort of use case, where neutrality, truth, and cited sources are important (at least on paper).
I hope some people watch this closely, Iām sure thereās going to be some gold in this mess.
Wikipediaās mod team definitely havenāt realised it yet, but this part is pretty much a de facto ban on using AI. AI is incapable of producing output that would be acceptable for a Wikipedia article - in basically every instance, its getting nuked.
lol i assure you that fidelitously translates to ākill it with fireā
Yeah, that sounds like text which somebody quickly typed up for the sake of having something.
it is impossible for a Wikipedia editor to write a sentence on Wikipedia procedure without completely tracing the fractal space of caveats.
Iād like to believe some of them have, but itās easier or more productive to keep giving the benefit of the doubt (or at at least pretend to) than argue the point.
Welcome to the club. They say a shared suffering is only half the suffering.
This was discussed in last weekās Stubsack, but I donāt think we mind talking about talking the same thing twice. I, for one, do not look forward to browsing Wikipedia exclusively through pre-2024 archived versions, so I hope (with some pessimism) their disapponintingly milquetoast stance works out.
Reading a bit of the old Reddit sneerclub can help understand some of the Awful vernacular, but otherwise itās as much of a lurkmoar as any other online circlejerk. The old guard keep referencing cringe techbros and TESCREALs Iāve never heard of while I still canāt remember which Scott A weāre talking about in which thread.
Scott Computers is married and a father but still writes like an incel and fundamentally canāt believe that anyone interested in computer science or physics might think in a different way than he does. Dilbert Scott is an incredibly divorced man. Scott Adderall is the leader of the beige tribe.
You Give Adderall A Bad Name
shit wasnāt there another one
There is always another Scott.
you know, one of the most abusive shitty people Iāve ever personally known was also a Scott
Montgomery Scott clearly statistical anomaly
Ah, but heās not really a Scott so much as a Scot, and a Monty to boot.
oh you did better than I did
5 internet cookies to you
first impression: your post is entirely on topic, welcome to the stubsack
techtakes is a sister sub to sneerclub (also on this instance, previously on reddit) and that one has a bit of an explanation. generally any (classy) sneerful critique of bullshit and wankery goes, modulo making space for chuds/nazis/debatelords/etc (those get shown the exit)
Now in 404media.
weāre pretty receptive to requests for explanations of terms here, just fyi! I imagine if it begins to overwhelm commenting, a guide will be created. Unfortunately there is something of an arms race between industry buzzword generation and good sense, and we are on the side of good sense.