“Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect: […] like a physician, who hath found out an infallible medicine, after the patient is dead.” —Jonathan Swift

  • 92 Posts
  • 746 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2024

help-circle

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldSay gex
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    in about 90% of the cases

    And other complete bullshit statistics I ripped out of thin air.

    If you think even close to 90% of homophobes – or fuck it, 90% of cases if you think the countable closet gay instances are vastly unevenly distributed among a tiny 1% – are doing it because they’re secretly aching for gay sex/romance, you’re out of your fucking mind and need to take that shit back to high school psychology.

    Just like 90% of racists don’t secretly wish they were another race or 90% of transphobes aren’t closet trans, this is egregiously wrong and nonsensical.






  • If you can’t know if it’s right or wrong, and have to double check it, why use it in the first place?

    “If you can’t trust that a friend solved a sudoku puzzle for you without checking it first, why even bother?”

    The obvious answer being that it’s much easier to check the solution to a sudoku puzzle than it is to solve it yourself. If you have reasonable means to check compared to going out and starting from scratch, then even a modest enough rate of correct answers can save a ton of time. LLMs don’t have that for me, but that’s also because I’ve been doing research as a hobby for 10 years.

    If you know anything about computation theory, there’s an entire class of problems for which checking a solution is (relatively) trivial but finding a correct one is highly non-trivial.






  • but nobody is making any sales revenue off somebody like me.

    Everybody who thinks this is definitely having sales revenue made off of them. It needs to be restated forever in discussions like this that the metric for success in online advertising is not largely “oh shit, I could go for one of those right now”.

    Those are what stick out in our mind because we remember them. I really did see an ad for Roblox as a kid and immediately go start playing. But sooooo much of advertising is subconscious to a point that we couldn’t possibly measure its true effect except by statistics.

    Even beyond what we purchase: I’ve been bombarded with sponsorships for Raycons for years. Even with SponsorBlock on YouTube, sometimes they leak through. I will never buy a Raycon product. But I still occasionally talk about them, inadvertently advertising them, simply because they’re a good punching bag. I watched a whole video reviewing what pieces of shit Raycons are. Fuck it: I’m talking about Raycon right now. And that’s still among the worst-case scenarios for the advertiser. So much of advertising isn’t “I want this product now” or even “this product looks desirable”; it’s headspace.

    The idea that advertisers’ psychological manipulation just doesn’t work on certain people needs to die and stay dead. If you saw it, it had an effect on you, and any effect is a better effect than nothing. If you realize an advertisement worked on you, the advertisement has failed part of its job.