Haeuserschlucht

That's cringe.

How does it work for you? IME responsibility if often put upon you when you don't have actual power over an outcome.

She died anyway, so AI is only as good as the sources it gets.

Please create it for wood as in "this is the wood you need to obtain or cut as in lwh. Then, how many screws do you need where" and so on.

3D printing this is too expensive in even a little bigger quantity. Maybe a combination of 3D print and wood, but 3D print is way too powerful to be wasted on even surfaces that could better be created with wood.

You seem to have done a lot, but it was always on a high level. It always started at the point, at the assumption, that you needed a lot of parameters to get good answers. Now tell me this. Who says that? So obviously you lack the hardware to train a model from scratch. So you don't know the mathematics behind what training from scratch means. You maybe know programs, but somebody created those programs. That wasn't you. So you are a consumer. You are not a creator in the original sense. I'm only willing to continue with this if you don't go ad hominem.

The solution is to exercise information minimalism without caring about how you are perceived.

That being said, my brainstorming-style writing is not easy to follow and I want my ideas spread and not my wording. Therefore I often dump a raw brainstorming session into chatgpt and tell it to make it understandable.

Gets the job done, it's great help.

Do you want to build a time-capsule?

That is not conclusive to being able to code. If you don't put yourself out there and your code for judgement, a lack of occupation is no rebuttal of ability.

But if you generalize this by asking, isn't code just a set of descriptions, have you written a tutorial and people used that? Then I would say, yes.

Of if you share some snippet and 1000 people see that and some upvote, are you able to code? Also refer to my other replies in this thread for clarification.

Thank you for your compassion, I really appreciate that.

Yet it is not so much about downplaying myself than rather thinking about whether what I did was useful, even necessary. Is there inherent intellectual value in fixing dependency issues? Or is the real value in the actual idea? In the perfect description of the problem? Basically the antithesis to the old-age statement of "Ideas are worth nothing, execution is what counts"?

I flagged your response.

Who benefits from living in the uk anyway?

Intersting, not my government though as I am in Germany. But are those huge deepseek models worth it? It seems that only proprietary models can match up.

On the other hand, we need to talk specifics. Measure up, how and regarding which benchmark.

I'm also on this track and I'm having this issue of seeing a wall of text and because I'm exposed to a lot of walls of text it is just too much information and I cannot comprehend the gist of it what I wanted to say. But on the same token, I think you are not really making it easier with this visual approach of mindmaps. But I don't really feel like sharing a better approach because your question is commercial.

You are so edgy.

I understand why you consider his question relevant. At the same time, it is worth making a clear distinction: OP does not formulate an alternative empirical explanation of physical reality, but rather a philosophical reflection on the consequences of the simulation assumption itself. In this context, the question of experimental testability is generally meaningful, but it misses the point here because it presupposes a scientific hypothesis that OP does not even propose. His objection would be justified if OP were to claim truth in the scientific sense — but he does not.

Your question about testability is justified. However, the considerations are not an empirical hypothesis in the scientific sense, but rather a philosophical argument. He is not claiming that the simulation hypothesis can be experimentally confirmed or refuted. His point is rather that even if one accepts the simulation hypothesis — even recursively — it does not result in a privileged beginning, a final observer, or ontological salvation. Change, emergence, and decay persist at every level. The question is therefore less whether we live in a simulation than what this assumption actually explains or changes.

Wrong approach.

what happened

What happens when you watch someone else live the life you wish you had — without lifting a finger? In this episode, we explore how parasocial relationships with influencers, celebrities, and digital lives can become a form of emotional escape. It's not just about envy — it's about the comfort of knowing you don’t have to do the work. We dive into why so many of us are content to stay where we are, even when the world seems to be moving faster. Is it fear? Guilt? Or simply the realization that the effort might not be worth the outcome?

This isn’t a call to stop dreaming — it’s a reflection on how we choose to engage with the world, and whether the lives we admire are really worth the price we pay to chase them.

It's not free and you didn't find it, it's simply disingenious marketing

Yes. Quite well readable.

I'd also like to have clit in my life. Didn't know you could just download it. My whole life was a lie.

It's better to have software erase all private details from text and have it checked by cloud ai to then have all placeholders replaced back at your harddrive.

20 minutes is a huge turnoff, unless you have it run over night.... Just to get the hint that you should exercise self care in the morning when presenting a legal paper and have the ai check it for flaws.

I prefer having answers to questions and then go on with my life. I'm not into discussing things that matter to me. I'm not into arguing about things that matter to me. I want the right answer that gives me results.

As I said, I have a thousand little questions. A thousand of them. And it's not about what is my vision in life. It's about every little question that you could think of. So what you are saying is, I assume, questions like "Is there a simulation or are we real?" or "Is time travel good".

And that's not at all what I am talking about. Those questions don't lead to useful results especially when asked by laymen who just want to be right and the other party to confirm their view.

That's also what bugs me the most, people think by setting boundaries I wanted to discuss things, or I cared about their unfounded opinions. I don't.

I want applicable knowledge and compassion from others and only that.

Interesting approach, I also like compassion

And I forgot to mention people who pride themselves in being cynical. That's pathetic and doesn't bring you any true friends. You are threatened by LLMs for good reason, because your audience hoping to read or hear any useful information, shrinks every minute.

I often think not another llm frontend.

What does that prove? Why shouldn't the 101th email convert?

Just curious, which kinds of people do things like that and document it like crazy?

Almost nobody is going to read it and he probably spent hours thinking about the right font size