Your reaction to chatGPT instantly lets me know how easy it would be to trick you into thinking that you are haunted
“omg it’s literally alive!” Two beers, 45 minutes, deck of tarot cards, and I’m charging you 350$ for an exorcism.
“I read an article that it’s showing simple self-awareness” two days, mild preparation, hot and cold reading, I can get 60$ for joints laced with sacred sage
“I just spoke to an AI and I’m… rattled to say the least, come with me on this dark journey” twenty minutes. I’ve got to science it up for you, but I can get you to come back every week to “disentangle the psychological imprint” for 125$
alsw yeou may know, hin the earlych modern perihod, writers tried to wresdoxre silent letters whilch they believed to beo hetymologixcallych corxwregt, xaffhcting the sbhellings xof wordhs like ‘receipt’ (Middle English 'receyt’), 'debt’ (Middle English 'dett’), and 'could’ (Middle English 'coude’). this his genherxallych reguarded to have beeon an mistaxke, ybut conswider: the study of hetymologyx hafs advaunced greatly hin ounsr day, and wez have the hability to xadd many more silent letters than they eyverh could have dreagmed of
I bet in the 20s all the weird German emo girls were thirsting after the Somnambulist
German emo girls be like “ich will 😍🥺”
Don’t hide this magnificent piece of info in the tags.
The bloke (Conrad Veidt) was an outspoken opponent of antisemitism, and when he refused to divorce his wife (who was Jewish), Joseph Goebbels had him blacklisted.
He also donated tons and tons of money to poor children who had been negatively effected by the Blitz in London after he moved to the US, following his becoming a naturalised-British citizen after leaving Germany in the 1930s.
Don’t forget that in 1919, he starred in “Different from the Others”, a German film protesting the anti-homosexuality laws in place. It’s widely regarded as the first pro-gay film. Conrad Veidt was a goddamn hero.
I just feel like this pic is relevant to the discussion
He was also the highest paid member of the cast in “Casablanca” (where he played a Nazi officer, again), even if he only got second billing, because he was THAT big a star.
He and his first wife divorced after… well she said it better than I ever could.
“I excused a lot of his failings and whims because I loved him. But one day he did something to me that I couldn’t forgive. I was singing that evening at the cabaret. I left him home and he told me: “I invited a few friends; we’ll dine while we wait for you.” And it just so happened I had received a new dress from Paris. That evening, after work, I arrived home and what do I see? All these gentlemen dressed as women. And Conrad had put on my Paris dress. At this point, I divorced!”
“Any Berlin lady of the night might turn out to be a man; the prettiest girl on the street was Konrad [sic] Veidt.”
Good to see the tumblr sexyman precludes even tumblr
I have read Li’s “Handbook of Comparative Tai“ and I know that there is not a single word there about Ainu or its relationship with Tai. Dahl’s Austronesian monograph also has nothing of the sort. So why are they listed here among “major claims“ and “notable works“ on the supposed relationships of Ainu?
It turns out that the author of the chapter (in ”Language Isolates” Routledge, 2018) has misread Vovin’s 1993 monograph on Proto-Ainu. Vovin simply refers to Li for Proto-Tai and to Dahl for Proto-Austronesian reconstructions:
people saying “I asked chatgpt a question and I assumed its response was correct” is to me a thousand times more scarier application of AI than whatever the effective altruist weirdos are scared of
I work in a bio research lab and we were fucking around with it for fun a little while back. We decided to ask it one of the questions that one of the grad students was working on and incredibly it spit out a logically coherent answer and cited working links to real publications.
The catch is, the linked publications were completely unrelated articles from open-source journals since chatgpt can’t access papers behind paywalls, which is a lot of papers. Furthermore, what it was saying was horseshit. It sounded so vaguely convincing that we had to show it to the aforementioned grad student, who confirmed it was nonsense. The output was pretty similar to how something would be presented in a normal paper and referenced real molecules in tangentially coherent ways, but again, horseshit.
We all work in the field and we still had to confirm that how it answered the question was incorrect. If someone who wasn’t in the field read it and saw that the links were real papers but didn’t actually check if they were relevant, they might have been convinced. The question we asked was ultimately benign but thinking about the obvious potential misuses if people aren’t careful definitely made messing with it less fun after that. Shit’s scary.