chownie

> This is not how it works in most parts of the Western world anymore. The child who is being bullied reports the bully and the authorities (usually a teacher or other faculty) address the issue with various forms of remediation. I feel sorry for you if this was your experience at school. It sounds awful.

It's very hard to take your opinions as sincere and earnest when you're in one comment selectively pruning hundreds of years of history to make your point and then pretending that bullying is a solved problem to make your point in another. Just a reminder that we're living in the realm of rising teenage suicide rates, much of that rooted in the trauma caused by bullying.

If nothing else I'd call on you to be kinder to the people you're responding to, who put in the effort when you're clearly not doing the same.

If their take was shallow yours is revisionist to the point it's ahistorical.

Choosing to focus on the "centuries-long process of cultural and educational and social progress beginning in the Enlightenment in 1650" but then ignoring that the suffragettes were bombing buildings within the decade they got the vote, do you not think you're laying your own narrative on a little too thick?

> I asked a model to evaluate your comment history and it found loads of patterns such as

> “I’m not sure…” / “I don’t…” hedges before disagreement Negation followed by correction/reframing is a recurring structure: essentially “It’s not X, it’s Y”.

I did a manual human dig through GP's profile and I don't see any evidence supporting this. The literal strings "I'm not sure" and "I don't" do appear a lot (also in replies, which I'm hoping your LLM was intelligent enough to exclude?), and they are used to hedge before making a statement, but not a single one of them even approaches the "It's not X, it's Y" thing your LLM has claimed they do.

Your LLM did not find dozens of examples, it told you it did and you didn't even bother to check.

The slugs in your soil carry a parasite which can cause lifelong paralysis if it enters your body, a lot of the worms do too. Those decomposing leaves carry tetanus. Your perspective is not aligned with reality.

What do you think soil is made of? Where do you think it comes from?

The keybindings (and lack of documentation for them) in Finder sucks, having to google how to show hidden files in a save dialogue every time I have to do it sucks, having to search through the UI every time for the non-obvious way to get to a specific path sucks. Do I need to mention .DS_Store?

There are loads of different file managers for many different operating systems, they look and act the way they do from years of refining UX in response to the way users actually interact with them. This is why the file manager on my android phone is so similar to the one on my windows machine, and my linux install. All of them are different to Finder which appeared to lock some UX decisions in circa 1990 and then refuse to budge, this is why Finder sucks.

It's the one OS where file and folder manipulation via the terminal is actually sometimes faster for me, no need to go digging for the specific ritual Finder uses in opposition to every other file manager to do the task.

> See I just don't think they're even similar. How is being sometimes (and sometimes is the operative word in ADHD) unable to follow instructions, forgetting things, having social anxiety, putting things off etc anything like the depression from being abused as a child?

Untreated ADHD is associated with a literal doubling in your suicide risk compared to your peers.

> and sometimes is the operative word in ADHD

No it isn't? I think you need to go and research what ADHD actually is, you appear to have formed an opinion without good foundations.

> One should question the rate of which it is diagnosed, and who is getting diagnosed.

The medical consensus after multiple enquiries in the UK has come to:

1. The rate of diagnosis is far too low (the evidence of this being we're catching people as adults who should've been caught as children).

2. Our diagnostic criteria aren't inclusive enough (we have historically missed inattentive presenting ADHD, we have historically missed ADHD presenting in women)

These results are politically unpalatable so the enquiry is I think currently being run for the third time, but signs point to ADHD overdiagnosis being a hoax/fake news/whatever you call it.

> I have always suspected that people with “aphantasia” simply misunderstand the idea of a “mind’s eye,” believing that others can somehow superimpose something onto their actual field of vision at will. Of course, this is not possible.

If "at will" is the hinging point then maybe not because the scenario to trigger the behaviour isn't clear to me still, but this is definitely possible.

I have had the superimposed belief-image confuse my spatial brain until I moved my point of view (in which the real world obviously reorients while the brain conjured image doesn't) to clear it before. This happened far more when I was younger than now as an adult, but it very much still happens.

The very last time I recall this happening was at my former home during a strenuous house move. I was on my back for a breather between boxes and a delay getting the car around gave me some time for my mind to wander, which it did on that occasion to thoughts about how very old buildings with column supports used to look. By the time I needed to move the next box I had to shake my head to de-conjure the little stone plinths that had appeared in my vision from my imagination trip.

This same behaviour does actually persist in other areas. I'm colourblind, even as an adult I have other people argue that perhaps I just don't know which colours are which rather than have a problem with the mechanism within the eye for detecting them.

Do children make their own medical decisions? Does society have no responsibility for historically relentlessly discouraging medication?

In my post history on this site I recall interacting with a user who had debilitating ADHD and was desperately asking people who had been medicated for ADHD what the best non-medication approach they'd tried was. He didn't care if the attempt was a complete failure, he wanted the most "successful" complete failure. He was resolute, he would never try medication because if it worked he might not be able to stop himself from taking it in the future.

What exactly are we doing? We are afraid of dulling the sparkle for a group who when left to their down devices (read: neglected) disproportionately end up homeless or in prison.

> If you are out walking your cat, and the cat bites someone, you should be responsible for that... I suspect the ruling distinguishes between pets that are out in public, vs generally private.

The distinction is in the responsibility it's reasonable for the cat owner to take vs the dog owner. Cats are free spirits, if your cat decides to pop out the cat flap for a fight there's really not much you can do about that. The law isn't even 100% on what to do when your cat decides to go and live in another house down the road. Are those homeowners involuntary bailees or thieves?

It turns out applying laws for a controlled animal (dogs) doesn't work, so the best we can do is try for half-way between a pet and property. My expectation is that AI is similar and there is no "aha, it's so easy, just do as we do for foo" as is proposed.

In the UK if your dog bites someone you are responsible, if your cat bites someone no one is responsible. Which settled case law do we follow?

If it's only occasional use then you're actually using the button sometimes and having it cover a chunk of every single picture you look at, all the time. It can go in a sub-menu.

I've seen the Claude writing style described as "every sentence intended to read as a reddit mic drop moment" and it really does feel like that.

There is vastly more toxic behaviour on Facebook, it's not even close.

If there's a severity to toxicity then perhaps 4chan can peak at a 9/10 whereas Facebook posts peak at a 7/10, but there's orders of magnitude more people posting on Facebook. If you pull in Facebook comment sections on news sites and consider those too, these threads where people publicly call for torture, rape and death, you realise that 4chan has an unearned bad reputation compared to the mainstream.

As kindly as I can, your comment is 100% the irrational behaviour.

Everyone who's replied thus far has fallen into the same trap, you saw money and you forgot the value of the actual thing he wanted. Now he has the thing, you're still stuck talking and thinking about the money.

This comment section sees two guys trading a briefcase of dollars bills all day long as a roaring economy. Somehow completely blind to the human.

He wants the thing. He does not value the thing at 1300 dollars so he would not buy it for 1300 dollars. He found it for a lower value, he kept it because the point at the start was he wanted the thing.

On the topic of HN users, is it our collective first day on earth?

Isn't the point that we don't grow the good varieties any longer because they don't survive freight? It doesn't matter if you bought the tomato seeds from Harrods and grew them in your lush orchard if they're the same lineage bred for shipping hardiness over all else.

You're equating subreddits to forums but on forums people recognised other posters and the average subreddit poster will never read the same username twice, if they even notice they're there.

I see the argument you're making, but it's not convincing. These just aren't similar types of social engagement.

> The current top comment isn’t there because it’s the most recent, the only objectively correct one, or a mod pinned it. It’s there because the algorithm driven by social engagement decided it’s the media I should see first.

When people neglect to vote that they like the comment you posted, or they vote that they didn't like the thing you posted, this is algorithm driven by social engagement.

When the forum software which sorts by newest-posted-first bumps your thread off the front page because no one cared enough to reply that was also an algorithm driven by social engagement.

It seems a lot to me like the "hidden algorithm" part is the same? It is still the users indicating more/no more in the end.

This is a phenomenal example I hadn't even considered, because I have been affected by this kind of "invisible hand of the market" negative quality spiral.

The older generation here remember good tomatoes, so they continue to buy bad tomatoes but will complain every time they eat them about the quality. I get told a lot about heirloom varieties and how good they are in comparison.

I grew up with modern tomatoes. I've never tried an heirloom so I can't compare, but I don't recall ever eating a good tomato, so I just don't buy them. The market has moved itself into a position that shrinks its own demographic.

Not that user but I don't think this is as difficult as you're making it out to be?

On Reddit, Instagram, Tiktok et al I can create a community on that platform. I can get find other people into Booktok, I can join the Rowing subreddit, I can get into Knittinggram or whatever. Posters expect roughly their micro-community to see their posts, users expect to see their micro-community's posts.

On hacker news I see the same community everyone else does. If HN was a vBulletin forum with threads posted for links it would function almost 1:1 the same, I guess all you'd need to change is a modification for making threads bump on vote behaviour instead of latest-post.

Is it not clear at this point that the real issue is how lacking the term "social media" even is? We have people here arguing that BBSs were social media, it will not be long until email is considered social media.

At this point it's a vague term meaning "a place where you talk to another person online" and nothing more than that.

I'm solidly of the opinion especially after seeing so many arguments of this form on HN that the whole world has accidentally forgotten the term "social network" at some point, because "social media" means nothing.

Other possibilities:

* The people are not fine with bad strawberries but have no other choices available

* The people are not fine with bad strawberries but can't afford better choices

* The people are not fine with bad strawberries but they don't know good strawberries

* The people are not fine with bad strawberries but they're cheap enough to ship and sell that there's no economic case for good strawberries, so no one close enough to buy from will sell good strawberries to them

"The market seems fine with it" is kind of a lazy thought terminating cliche answer. What if the invisible hand of the market is pushing strawberry producers towards the outcome "society no longer values this enough to buy it" in which case the aggregate wallet vote will be zero?

There's an NPC who walks you to the pokemart and gives you a potion. For me that dialogue was something like "You receive a !" and it then said "You place it in the 23 pocket" -- seems related?

Tons? Hyperbole? Are they teachers or something? That amount of leave in one go is basically unheard of, with the exception of maternity leave I don't know anyone who's been on leave for more than 3 weeks as a single block.

This is also taking from that same 5 week leave bucket people have available per annum, if they're taking 4 weeks then they have 5 days to last the remainder of the year. Not that crazy, but I have literally never even met a single person who does this let alone knowing tons.

You have confused 5 weeks (across a year) for 5 weeks (contiguous), this isn't speciality european confusion it's the regular garden variety.

This article goes ham on the rule of threes, it does the "not just x, but y" cliche, em-dash with spaces on either side, bold heading-sentence paragraphs, it visibly has hallmarks of AI driven writing.

If you personally can't tell then just say that rather than casting aspersions on everyone else by claiming they can't.

I have noticed the same uptick in bot-like behaviour there. The part I struggle to square is, why so much of it is so useless?

It's maybe account laundering, but on any popular post you'll see at least half of the comments are tangential at best. They're not an expression of anything a person would express, like replying with just skull emojis to a random news post, or saying "he really said" with an exact word to word recreation of a throwaway quote from a video. No one ever replies to these posts, they get like 2 upvotes (if that), the platform doesn't reward them at all but they constantly appear in a very artificial looking way.

> No, it's the ultra authoritarian government stopping you from viewing it.

Wish people wouldn't keep repeating this, imgur block the UK because they were caught with GDPR violations.

The fact their UK wide IP block came in around the same time as the online safety act is the only reason they can continue to quietly pretend it's the government's fault. Imgur is the reason you can't view imgur, it is not the UK Govt (this time)