webadict

There's a lot to disagree with here.

Ian is NOT the most malicious person in the movie because Bear literally rapes Nikki repeatedly. That isn't to say Ian is a good person, just that there is definitely a worse person in the movie.

Bear does NOT end his own life on purpose at the end of the movie, either. Bear tries to throw up the medicine to save himself and is only stopped because Wish-Nikki makes her own wish that inadvertently stops him.

Hell, the lesson of the movie isn't even to not wish for love! He could have wished for love! The point is that Bear never actually loved Nikki. Every scene reinforces that he doesn't actually care about her, that he doesn't really know anything about her. He doesn't even care that the Nikki inside of Wish-Nikki is being tormented. He tries everything to make Nikki into the person he wants instead of freeing her. He only cares about himself, and it isn't even until Wish-Nikki starts literally killing people that he even bothers to actually try to undo his wish.

It's NOT a monkey's paw, though. If anything it is maybe a deconstruction of a monkey's paw trope.

See, the One Wish Willow does not manipulate your wish to give you something you didn't ask for, nor does it backlash. Bear wished for a selfish wish. There were a ton of people throughout the film that wished for things and got exactly what they wished for. Heck, Bear's friend gets a billion dollars.

Like, I get that Bear's wish is corrupted, but he could've wished to be someone that Nikki liked. He could've wished to be better at talking to girls. He could've wished to be less cowardly. Those are less selfish versions of the same wish.

It wasn't the act of wishing that ruined his wish, but that he used his wish to manipulate someone else. He was the reason his wish was ruined.

I have seen every ML/LLM translation be shit, so if you want to point to a less shitty version, whatever. It will not matter to me because every AI translation given to me was god fucking awful versus even a shitty human translation because humans, in their flawed yet understandable ways, do not translate things in arbitrary ways, nor do they make the same types of mistakes that an AI does. Humans understand how humans think, and the process of writing a sentence vs a paragraph vs a chapter vs a book are just... Different? But an AI just won't understand those differences. Not to any noticeable effect. Nor do they understand nuances in writing and dialog. They just write or do a sarcasm thing, and that's the entirety of their repertoire. That's all they "know".

Is it personally attacking you to point out that it is a monstrous thing to use AI while it is pretty actively killing the planet or that it is using stolen labor to work and refuses to recompense said labor? Because to me, that's just kinda how it is, and if you can't see the issues in that, it does sort of imply someone failed you at some point.

If it is catching that many bugs, you are writing shit code or your review system blows. Likely both. The AI is about as likely to flag real bugs as it is to flag made up shit, but I still have to waste my fucking time verifying and proving the bot wrong. And you know what it didn't do? Save me time. Because I had to verify everything it said for no fucking reason.

And my fucking god, don't let it generate Tests. You get the worst Asserts imaginable. Goddamn. If you aren't writing your unit tests, then you won't know what you are testing.

Also, AI-based translation is hilariously awful. Like, let's assume for the sake of argument that the translation was technically correct (a thing that is not even mostly true), it will always underperform in terms of meaning because good translation conveys the spirit of the words and not the letter. AI translations don't know shit from Jack because they don't know anything, nor do they understand the context in which the words stand. And if you are having issues with translating and you're relying on AI to do so, then how the fuck would you even know it was working correctly?

Legitimately stupid.

But, sure, take out all the slave labor and environmentally devastating issues (a thing that only huge losers do because they are usually friendless assholes that think they're as cool as Elon Musk and are unintentionally right), and you are left with a machine that is sometimes right but still cognitively damaging.

You just gotta do at least three hours per hour, and it's easy!

I'm not a monkey!

We also train people how to use cars. Not as well as we should, but you do have to pass a test to use it. But there are many, many regulations for cars.

We cannot train people how to use generative AI in the same manner. Not least because there is no magic method of using it, but every single training I have been to has said, in no uncertain terms, that the AI can and will lie to you, so don't trust anything it says. Usually directly after it has failed to do as asked.

We do not gate AI. Anyone can use it, and it is, frankly, devastatingly addictive to many people. It has killed people. It is environmentally destructive.

So, I do blame the AI companies that run the software for mistakes because they don't fucking care. They just want money.

Cool. Now in three months, I can repaste this reply back to you! Thank you!

Those bugs that generative AI found in Linux were some old bugs that, and I cannot stress this enough, required elevated access to your system and only crashed the machine. Basically, it wasn't found because it never actually affected anybody, but sure, take your win. You were lacking them.

And hey man, if you caught some strays on that comment, maybe consider going outside. There are people out there that could enjoy being around you if you stopped talking about AI! They are rather nice because they typically like other people and don't call them Luddites for not wanting to kill the planet tp avoid writing an email.

But, sure, let's play the dumbfuck game where AI proponents use their definitions to pretend that a chatbot (a thing that doesn't really matter to LLMs in general since they've existed for fucking decades) and an agent (basically the same shit as an LLM but directed) are things that truly matter in the discourse. They don't. People that don't want their brain rotted from the inside out just hate AI. Not wanting to turn your brain off seems pretty fucking normal to me, but maybe it doesn't to you because the thoughts in your head are a nightmare to experience.

The market is not a predictor of good things. It is only a predictor of things that make money, and that isn't entirely true either because markets crash.

Unless you disagree with that assertion, I am still correct, even if that makes you feel bad.

That is what people have said, every day, on repeat, for the last three years. Explain why it is better now instead of three months ago, when it was definitely not fucking up all the time and then I will copypaste that back to you for what was said three months ago for the same question.

Which standards are you gonna hold it to? The benchmarking involves using standardized testing, but they typically just feed those questions into the testing data, so the tests have to be constantly updated, and when they are, you will not be surprised to learn that the machines goes back to fucking up the answers all the time.

Experts in their fields do not use this shit because it is wrong on the things they know, but, oh wow, it must be totally right about the things I don't know anything about? Every time.