Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

Last week’s thread

(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)

  • self@awful.systemsEnglish
    0·
    9 days ago

    all the replies anthropomorphizing the LLM cause it generated something creepy and they don’t know why aren’t surprising, but for some reason this one really pisses me off:

    I just checked out the conversation and it looks legit. So weird. I cannot imagine why it would generate a completion like this. Tell your brother to buy a lottery ticket.

    an LLM generating absolute garbage that happens to be abusive in some way is a lottery ticket event, is it? I had no idea lottery wins happened that fucking frequently

    • Sailor Sega Saturn@awful.systemsEnglish
      0·
      9 days ago

      Yeah absolutely. This is happening right on the coattails of that Character.AI suicide too so it’s not like a freak impossible to predict accident. I mainly posted it because it flies in the face of all the talk of AI safety and “responsible AI practices”.

      Like Google says in their AI principles:

      We will continue to develop and apply strong safety and security practices to avoid unintended results that create risks of harm. We will design our AI systems to be appropriately cautious, and seek to develop them in accordance with best practices in AI safety research. In appropriate cases, we will test AI technologies in constrained environments and monitor their operation after deployment.

      I don’t even care that much if Google wants to host a chatbot, but they keep trying to imply it has safety properties it doesn’t. It’s like writing a web framework without any HTML or SQL sanitation support and saying “We will continue to develop and apply strong safety sand security practices…” and acting shocked when all the websites get hacked.