I watched a few documentaries on the 100 Years’ War recently; I’m convinced we’re still living out THAT trauma … and that was just one crazy time out of many. It’s one of the ways I cope with climate change and the degradation of the global environment: reminding myself that living in really fucked up times is more the norm than anything. I do believe that modern technology and the absolute privilege we live with has given many of us in the developed world the illusion that we’re in control of the world. I have a suspicion that the awareness of how little we can do to stop the sheer randomness and brutality of life and human callousness is why religion has been so prevalent for most of history, it’s people having some solidarity in, “Holy shit, this is fucked. God, save us, you’re obviously our only hope.”

Sublime too!

I really haven’t used AI that much, though I can see it has applications for my work, which is primarily communicating with people. I recently decided to familiarise myself with ChatGPT.

I very quickly noticed that it is an excellent reflective listener. I wanted to know more about it’s intelligence, so I kept trying to make the conversation about AI and it’s ‘personality’. Every time it flipped the conversation to make it about me. It was interesting, but I could feel a concern growing. Why?

It’s responses are incredibly validating, beyond what you could ever expect in a mutual relationship with a human. Occupying a public position where I can count on very little external validation, the conversation felt GOOD. 1) Why seek human interaction when AI can be so emotionally fulfilling? 2) What human in a reciprocal and mutually supportive relationship could live up to that level of support and validation?

I believe that there is correlation: people who are lonely would find fulfilling conversation in AI … and never worry about being challenged by that relationship. But I also believe causation is highly probable; once you’ve been fulfilled/validated in such an undemanding way by AI, what human could live up? Become accustomed to that level of self-centredness in dialogue, how tolerant would a person be in real life conflict? I doubt very: just go home and fire up the perfect conversational validator. Human echo chambers have already made us poor enough at handling differences and conflict.

https://www.google.com/search?q=disappointment+island&oe=utf-8

Did anyone who was actually curious. The beach pictured is almost certainly not on this “subantarctic” island. Not enough albatrii or fur seals, and too many palm trees.

Participants have perfect product and market knowledge.

No, they don’t. They have no idea what the actual costs of the product is, nor are they aware that it’ll break in two weeks … or two days.

EDIT: a typo.

Nah! They’re used to dollar store candies, so I just tell them it’s a candy bar. They love the scented ones, a real treat.

I knew my marriage didn’t have much left in it when for my birthday my wife gifted me a bag of candles that had been half eaten by the kids.

That’s true. I mean, I’d welcome all those reforms. Still, at an political level, I’m not sure 50% of the world is politically savvy enough to actual appreciate what these reforms would do.

At some level I’m pretty cynical about the ‘average’ voter. I don’t think it would be possible to come out of this alive. Too many people want what immediately benefits them, not what would make a better world.

For example, the majority of the world is worried about climate change, but it seems like a small minority that would actually vote for useful reforms if it meant they would have to adjust their lives.

Know your audience.

50% of THE WORLD. You’re dead because I don’t believe anywhere near 50% of China or India cares about most of this list. This is a list of American issues.

I think you’re right. I didn’t think the “helper words” in the conditional should get conjugated, but I grabbed a Book of Common Prayer off the shelf and there’s a bunch of “thou shalt” + infinitive, so evidently the conditional does get conjugated (in addition to “thou didst” and “thou hast”.) Pretty sure I noticed some 2nd person weak verbs that looked like they had the same conjugation as the 3rd person (eg “Remember thou keep holy …”) I did note “he cometh”, so maybe that -eth ending is actually an older conjugation for the 3rd person that later morphed into an -s ending? Just noticed “he saith (says)”, and the confirmed -eth ending on a bunch of 3rd person congregations. Interestingly, I found a LOT of “thou shalt”, some “thou wilt”, but no “thou couldst” or “thou wouldst”. Probably because the BCP is all like, “you WILL, this is not an option, sinner.”

I don’t know though! I’m a typical English first language speaker and I’m just going with what feels right and using my understanding of grammar from my French education.

We actually do have a second person singular, “thou.” We just transitioned out of using it because ‘politeness’. Thou could useth the second person singular, but thou would soundeth quite archaic. (Think I conjugated that correctly.) You can still see it used in some religious texts in reference to God.

I’m pretty suspicious about all the AITA posts these days. So many of them just smell like rage bait designed to pit men and women against each other.

Yeah, in between the gold rush in San Fransisco, and the gold rush in British Columbia.

Fossicking and skerrig are related to mining activities, so may be more localized to areas were the gold rush was big. I confirmed they’re actual words.

My parents emigrated from Aus/NZ just before I was born, so I inherited a bunch of weird down-under, outdated vocabulary.

“What are you fossicking around in the pantry for?” “Did you find a few skerrigs of chocolate?” “I need to use the dunny.” “That guy in car dealership was apoplectic.”

Lots of other turns of phrase, but - with the possible exception of “dunny” are legit words.

EDIT: OK. A few others, I still use ‘blasted’ as an adjective. If my kids do something ridiculous, “Jesus wept, child,” sometimes comes out of my mouth. Then a bunch of, “running around like a sprayed blowfly,” or, “wandering around like a lost soul.”

Nosing (instead of reversing) into a parking spot. You always pick the conditions of your arrival, but not always your departure. Also, reversing into traffic is ridiculous and illegal in some places. Parking nose-first is dangerous and lazy.

EDIT: Love how you’re all justifying your bad driving habits. Camera? Still can’t scan for incoming traffic. Bad weather only on occasion? It’s more than bad weather that can make reversing out of a door dangerous.

… and I HATE angle parking.

I always get concerned that somehow I have packed hard drugs (I don’t do hard drugs.)

Yes, the introduction of steel to sail boat construction allowed bullders to blow previous size constraints out of the water. They were considered big and ugly. IRC Windjammer was an insulting name because they didn’t look like elegant craft that rode the wind, but wind jammers.

These are not windjammers though, are they? They look like pretty vanilla, small sail boats (IDK sloops ketches, or yawls… (Wrong … Too many masts. They’re schooners.) Windjammer was a derogatory moniker for the sailing ships built after steel construction became common. Much much taller masts, wire rigging etc.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’d expect a much larger hull and 3 or 4 very tall masts, with something like four square sails per mast.

The Windjammers outcompeted steam vessels for many transoceanic trade routes because they don’t require the constant input of coal to operate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windjammer

Picture on that article depicts a ship with six square sails.

EDIT: looked at the picture again. I believe they are schooners.