this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2026
14 points (93.8% liked)

memes

22472 readers
3603 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (36 children)

You can't follow the sentence "the way you worded that implied that all the information you have was 'gifted' by 'random chance'"?

Lots of people enjoy general knowledge. There's even quite a few games and TV-shows based on it. You'd argue that everyone who did well in those, or say, Trivial Pursuit, are better by chance because they were "gifted" something instead of having had worked for it?

There are people addicted to generalised trivia and facts and then there are people who don't understand the difference between amperes and volts, despite that being taught in pretty much all basic education in at least the developed world.

But no, the kids getting A's didn't work for anything, they were just gifted?

Just like

This girl was also probably gifted her massive arms. I mean, there's so many other things she could possibly be doing with her arms, so it's just random that she'd get larger ones on purpose. It was a random "gift" from... God?

And this isn't even about the context. Again, the way you worded it excluded experts as well. But you just have to move the goalposts instead of saying "yeah, you're right, it does imply that, I could've worded that better". No, instead you're like "I didn't mean experts, obviously!" Why not? (Do you notice btw how I'm asking you things instead of telling them? Wish there was like a name for this style of rhetoric. Can someone perhaps think of one?)

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (35 children)

You misunderstood me.

I wasn't talking about learning at all.
I never said anything against the human activity of learning. I feel like I triggered you on something personal, for which I'm sorry.

Being in the vicinity of information --> gifted the chance to absorb/learn/remember it.

The girl was gifted (by which I mean randomised circumstances) the chance to put in the effort for those gains, yet she still can't lift a mountain, much less the galaxy. She wouldn't have the same gains if she was in a famine, or without arms, or a snail.
Again, that is not diminishing her efforts, attitude, results in any way, bcs we understand the context of human lives individually (ie she's amazing).

Trivia nerds won't know what random number I'm thinking of. Or what is dark matter. Or which human pooped the largest poop in 1000BC.

Learning is fun, it has a lot of positive synergies with basically everything, and we tend to rightfully cherish knowledgeable ppl more. And we don't think knowledgeable ppl are dumb bcs they don't know things they were never privy to learn. I'm still not sure why would you assume my standing to the opposite, but I think we already cleared that isn't the case.
I didn't move any goalposts (that's just you trying to win something I think - I did include experts) & I think most understood me correctly. But you just wanted to argue (my use of the word gift) like a master debater & extended my simple point into wannabe "this guy doesn't appreciate ppl's efforts & thinks learning is fake".
That's just mean.

Here, have some inspirational quotes (with maybe the general use of the word gift that is lacking in this convo):




[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (34 children)

I never said anything against the human activity of learning

Honestly seeing this level of "rhetoric" is just... well I'm just bored arguing kids/idiots like you. You can't actually stand behind your words, so you try to make it personal.

No, you haven't "triggered" anything by wording your comment poorly, but like I said, instead of just saying "oh right you are, that wording does indeed have that implication, I'll word it better" you're going all out on these pathetic ad hominems. Which is a term I'm 85% sure you're gonna misuse due to fundamentally misunderstanding it.

Being in the vicinity of information --> gifted the chance to absorb/learn/remember it.

Hahaha dude you do crack me up. You've never heard of willfull ignorance, or can't imagine it's opposite? I pity you.

Trivia nerds won't know what random number I'm thinking of.

Yeah uhm does that mean that they don't exist and/or have a much larger grasp of a million different little things than someone who's wasted their life thinking information just randomly spawns into you, so they didn't bother actively learning anything.

But you just wanted to argue (my use of the word gift) like a master debater & extended my simple point into wannabe *"this guy doesn't appreciate ppl's efforts & thinks learning is fake

That's known as a strawman my little silly-billy. And it's just like I said. You literally can not say "my mistake, I could've worded that better" you've made this be some sort of contest.

It's really not. If it were, you wouldn't stand a chance with, again, that childish level of rhetoric.

I think I've deeply triggered your traumas of getting beat hard in all the quizzes you've ever taken (I don't think you're really the type to play Trivial Pursuit, lolololol.) And that's okay. Learning is good. Like learning to handle your personal emotions and feelings of inferiority.

Which is what you're having a complex about here, because I'm just pointing out your original wording did in fact imply that you think all information we have was "gifted by random chance".

Being mean doesn't equate to an ad hominem, by the way. Neither do insults. They're not synonyms, which you'd know if you had ever spent any time actually learning about them. But you didn't. Perhaps you thought "random chance" would just plop it in your head one day? RUAHAHAHA :D

[–] treesapx@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You argue like a chat bot designed to be obtuse and arrogant.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Woe what a great argument, sure showed me my place.

LLM's are all sycophantic and if you're having a hard time telling a person from an LLM, you must be stupid af.

And because you can't answer any of the rhetoric even at the level of a shitty slopbot you don't answer, just adhom. Lololol

load more comments (32 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)