i did some testing, and despite my account being synced on mobile, they exhibit different behaviours, curious

just realised i dont have the energy for this rn, ill come back tomorrow

the database schema they use misspells the word "frequency" lol

current discussion of GenAI's mental health effects seems to be primarily limited to extreme cases affecting laypeople. but i think the same process is playing out across the board, including people who otherwise know their stuff. it's the only way i can make sense of the state of the discussion

occam's razor: is it more likely that the tech you're recklessly adopting and has clear - if poorly understood - effects on your sense of reality is going to be bigger than electricity? or is it cooking your brain, and you're not immune even as an expert who understands it more than most

sorry for reviving this threat out of nowhere (saw it a while back but only now do I have something to add) but i think there's a genuine occupational hazard related to GenAI exposure in general that is clearly affecting heavy users (including experts!) to a scale that nobody is seriously discussing

magical thinking tends to arise in circumstances where we either cannot or only weakly, unpredictably affect something that in turn has a major impact on ourselves. gamblers, old-timey doctors, scientists working with poorly understood things, etc. are good examples of this. or athletes! as you said

i can hardly blame them when their careers are at the mercy of highly unpredictable and capricious machine learning tools that can turn on you at any moment without notice for unclear reasons

this is a lesser discussed but very profound conequence of opaque AI tools being given power over our lives

i think the labrys symbol is sick but the new flag is just better aesthetically

i want to make a landing page that is neither completely useless on desktop nor ridiculously cluttered on mobile but that would require
1) redoing the entire DOM
2) redoing the subpages as well
aaaaaaa

like a specific race or age group within?
when someone stops thinking of sex as a fixed, "natural" category, and instead as a categorisation invented by humans, these questions make sense to ask and answer and can be very instructive about how the world actually works

when someone sees "sex: F" on a document, what comes to mind for them? is that preconception accurate? how did that preconception come to be? why is it that people's understanding of "male"/"female" characteristics are often not shared by most people in that category, or apply only to subgroups,

2) socially constructing a category is also about when and where it's relevant. should my sex appear on the documents I show the train conductor? is it *actually* true that a fuzzy abstraction like that appearing on my records helps doctors, or would it be more useful to deconstruct it?

there are multiple angles to this.
1) something being a social construct ≠ something not "mattering" or "being real". the underlying characteristics we call "sex" exist, but we have to understand their malleability and the fact that it's humans sorting them into 2+ broad categories, not nature.

If LLM coding tools are to be widely adopted in the profession we seriously need to reckon with how addictive they seem to be. not sure if they're inherently Like That or if they're designed to be that way to juice usage but it's deeply concerning either way

There's also a subset of software engineers who seem to have completely gone of the deep end (thinking of Yegge et al here)

ATosphere would be an interesting compromise. maybe ATProsphere? i dont know

neither tbqh. "atmosphere" is unsearchable. "fediverse" works because it's not identically shaped to another, mich more common word

i admittedly don't know enough about nor have the money to properly try out "agentic" coding but the vibes around the whole thing are undescribably rancid. bluntly, a lot of the people in this subculture seriously need to take a break and come fown to reality