And show me where I said people were using AI to read it.
Because I was describing the class of reading material which is dry and unimaginative, to contrast your description of what reading does to peoples minds.
I was describing two classes of data: the kind that fit what your describe, and therefore people don’t actually use AI on it, and dry technical data that doesn’t grant the benefits you describe. I did not say if people use AI on the technical material, only that they don’t use it with the enjoyable material.
So no, I didn’t say that, and if you read it as carefully a you seem to expect everyone else but you too, then you’d have just shut up instead of doubling down embarrassingly.
You’ve put it in the same list of things people dislike, along with talking to coworkers they don’t like. Right after making a point of people using AI for things they don’t like to do. Maybe you should ask the AI that generates your comments to try better.
Ah, yeah, if we’re playing the game of nitpick: show me where I claimed people were using AI to read warning labels? My first response to you started with “if”. At no point did I assert that as a fact or even assumption. But since you took it so personally, I might have hit too close to home?
Or are you saying that what you describe is the experience that you get from reading technical manuals for your work? For reading warning labels? From talking with coworkers you dislike?
You
If you use AI instead of reading warning labels, please get the fuck out of whatever job you’re doing. You’ll save countless lives, first of all your own.
Them
If that’s what you thought that I said, then you have no right to judge people on their lack of intelligence or literacy.
You
Yes, that’s what I thought you said, because that’s what you said. If you’ve somehow said something opposite from what you meant, that’s on you.
Get off your alt account, brother. If you can’t be arsed to continue responding from the same account, take a break from the internet and touch some grass.
Okay I think you’re off your rocker if you can’t conceive of more than one person disagreeing with you in any given time that you assume anyone else is an alt lmao
And you’re so bad at arguing that you might actually benefit from AI debating classes.
Considering you’re lacking in literacy skills, for the sake of reducing any confusion I specifically meant “your arguing skills are so bad that a bullshit class would actually improve it instead of degrading it, because it can’t get any worse”. AND I don’t condone getting one’s education from AI, in case you ever misconstrue what I said.
Been there done that, I tried experimenting with SLMs and found that it was bad at simulating a language learning environment without internet. Unfortunately for you, it was for curiosity’s sake. I go to a school manned by actual people and I am probably a more diligent and active student than you ever were.
Are you mad at the statement above? Is it wrong and you’re going to say I don’t know you because you are actually some sort of Ivy League scholar cum laude or whatever? You’ll be a hypocrite. Because what are you doing? All you have done is create wrong conclusions, show your blatant lack of self-awareness and think you’re above arguing with your own conclusions, and that you’re above arguing your actual points with the other party. Don’t you ever wonder whether you are actually wrong?
Write why you think the way you do, and you’ll be aware of what you’re actually thinking.
Don’t think I agree with the other guy just because I disagree with you. No, you’re just so horrible that I need to point it out to you.
And show me where I said people were using AI to read it.
Because I was describing the class of reading material which is dry and unimaginative, to contrast your description of what reading does to peoples minds.
I was describing two classes of data: the kind that fit what your describe, and therefore people don’t actually use AI on it, and dry technical data that doesn’t grant the benefits you describe. I did not say if people use AI on the technical material, only that they don’t use it with the enjoyable material.
So no, I didn’t say that, and if you read it as carefully a you seem to expect everyone else but you too, then you’d have just shut up instead of doubling down embarrassingly.
You’ve put it in the same list of things people dislike, along with talking to coworkers they don’t like. Right after making a point of people using AI for things they don’t like to do. Maybe you should ask the AI that generates your comments to try better.
Ah, yeah, if we’re playing the game of nitpick: show me where I claimed people were using AI to read warning labels? My first response to you started with “if”. At no point did I assert that as a fact or even assumption. But since you took it so personally, I might have hit too close to home?
Them
You
Them
You
Get off your alt account, brother. If you can’t be arsed to continue responding from the same account, take a break from the internet and touch some grass.
Okay I think you’re off your rocker if you can’t conceive of more than one person disagreeing with you in any given time that you assume anyone else is an alt lmao
Oh I’m sure there more than one AI bro in this thread. I just can hardly imagine there being another one as dumb as you.
And you’re so bad at arguing that you might actually benefit from AI debating classes.
Considering you’re lacking in literacy skills, for the sake of reducing any confusion I specifically meant “your arguing skills are so bad that a bullshit class would actually improve it instead of degrading it, because it can’t get any worse”. AND I don’t condone getting one’s education from AI, in case you ever misconstrue what I said.
I can see why you wouldn’t condone AI education even with your lack of common sense. Clearly it didn’t do yourself any good.
Been there done that, I tried experimenting with SLMs and found that it was bad at simulating a language learning environment without internet. Unfortunately for you, it was for curiosity’s sake. I go to a school manned by actual people and I am probably a more diligent and active student than you ever were.
Are you mad at the statement above? Is it wrong and you’re going to say I don’t know you because you are actually some sort of Ivy League scholar cum laude or whatever? You’ll be a hypocrite. Because what are you doing? All you have done is create wrong conclusions, show your blatant lack of self-awareness and think you’re above arguing with your own conclusions, and that you’re above arguing your actual points with the other party. Don’t you ever wonder whether you are actually wrong?
Write why you think the way you do, and you’ll be aware of what you’re actually thinking.
Don’t think I agree with the other guy just because I disagree with you. No, you’re just so horrible that I need to point it out to you.