I agree that this is a meme. It’s not a meme with widespread meaning yet, but I think a chip on the forehead, the obvious young age of the boy, and his expression of mixed happiness/fear is enough to convey something about the state of society that calls for nervous laughter.

I 100% agree with you.

I do, of course. I even do my hair. I didn’t mean to imply that one should not care about it hygienically, just for your own health and personal self image.

I just don’t understand the urge to thrust gender identity onto hair style and then argue about what that means to the polity online.

Why do people put so much energy into projecting identity politics on a superfluous detail like hair? Who cares? It’s all just a vanity concern, selfishly obsessed with what others think about how you look.

Does your hair make you have some intrinsic identity to others that you are or are not going for? Fuck you, I don’t care.

Do you authentically care, yourself?

Maybe you care about the politics - I can understand that. There is legitimate fear around legislating serious, dangerous things to your identity (not hair). Why the fuck are you spending your time and energy on hair???

Emotions are each examples of a continuum. You can be any level of sad or happy or angry, etc.

I’m not sure the distinction of spectrum from continuum is useful for understanding the world though. It’s just conversationally helpful.

Perhaps everything is a continuum but we just manufacture a spectrum so we can classify people for our own ease of conversation.

Hey what part do you think looks like AI slop?

I can’t see anything suspect but I’m looking pretty hard for it. If I’m wrong then that’s scary.

Is the photo somehow glitched that I don’t see?

I agree with you. Something I noticed and wanted to add: When I mention UBI to people, a lot of them are hearing it like a guarantee that everyone gets enough income to be happy or be comfortable.

I have found that people who interpret basic income in this way tend to become strongly opposed to UBI on the grounds that it could never be funded and would lead to social collapse due to limited resources.

Idk what you picture, but I imagine a person on UBI affording to eat rice and beans in a studio apartment somewhere in a low cost-of-living and low property value geography (though perhaps among pleasant neighbors and like minded folks).

So I kind of think the name “Universal Basic Income” needs to be reworked so it sounds more harsh, almost like a necessary evil. Something like “Rock Bottom Income”, idk.

I don’t have the perfect answer, but do you think conservatives would get on board if it was like “The poors can’t complain, they can take their complaints straight to Bean Town if they don’t like the wages” or do you think they’d still find it unpalatable?

No, but you have access to the protocol so you write your own algorithm.

Then it is your algorithm, using the common protocol, that goes out and retrieves search results for your feed.

Likewise, 3rd party corporations can write their own algorithms on the protocol and everyone can choose which algorithms fill their personal feed with search results - turning them on or off on a whim, at a personalized level.

I recently listened to Paul Frazee talk about Bluesky on the Software Engineering Radio podcast and it struck me that one thing they got right was looking at social media like a search engine looks at the web, instead of like a centralized platform(Facebook) and instead of like a federated network of platforms(fediverse).

If your feed is understood to be just the search results you see, then users can understand that their algorithm is something they need to work on in the same vein that they change their search parameters on Google or Bing or other search engines.

This is a story that’s been rotating through the media since ChatGPT first released.

I have an unpopular opinion about this headline after seeing the media cycle repeatedly downplay/ignore what Alphabet has been doing in response to OpenAI: Google the search engine is not in direct competition with ChatGPT, but Gemini is, and Alphabet is smart to keep simpler/time-tested search functionality central to Google rather than react strongly and scrap the keyword-based search bar that users understand are comfortable using - especially older users, but I think most people are starting to discover they have a use for both search and LLM chats.

I think there are two product categories here, which first looked like they were going to converge in 2022-2024, but which are now slowly changing course as customers start to comprehend how both are necessary for different purposes.

When I make chats in ChatGPT or Gemini or Claude etc, I am starting to plan them longitudinally so that I can use them over and over for a specific project or query type.

When I turn to a search bar, it’s because I really want a proxy for a specific website or between me and whatever weird site has the answer to my specific question. It’s not that I want discussion and a chat about it, I just want Google’s card-like results with a website index I can read instead of that website’s stylized, animated web design on top or popups or malware.

Every time I get sucked into a chat with Bing CoPilot(ChatGPT) when I really only had a web search query, I regret wasting my time talking to the LLM. Almost as a reflex, I’ve started avoiding it for most things now.

Iran’s government sucks, but this story really shows how the Iranian people are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Regular Iranians have more in common with western social values than those of the Iranian government or Russia - it’s been that way before, during, and after the Iranian revolution.

Not sure what the answer is, but they keep trying to protest and resist their government every few years and they get violently forced back into submission.

Of all the countries with screwed up regimes, Iran is one where I think it’s more appropriate to encourage more fluid immigration into western countries - a lot of their working age population is relatively better educated than many other countries too.

Is this for real? Do these exist and are they any good?

I think they probably wake up thinking exclusively about how to increase their net worth, through politics and marketing, at the expense of low information voters.

This seems shitty for consumers, but I think it’s not new shit - it’s just a window into the reality of exploitation we have all been living with our entire lives and it’s uncomfortable to confront that giant turd we don’t like to think about.

Retailers like maximum profit and they are going to point to supply/demand to justify it. With these digital price tags, they’re just equipped to do it more quickly and more often.

At first, I was thinking: What if I grab an item from the shelf and then it’s 20% more expensive by the time I get to checkout. Then, I realized they’re just going to claim I saw the final price on the checkout summary and should have denied the purchase at that time.

If we legislate anything, it should be the clarity around checkout/returns imo.

Why would you answer your front door for police at all?

If they’re saying “we’re breaking down the door” or something, I can imagine answering but, otherwise, I’m not saying a word and I’m hoping they just go away.

I do not pronounce that part of a URL. Who still does that? Why would you need to do that?

https://lemmy.ca/post/25179438

Yes, really! I thought you might find the post I’m linking above interesting. It was at the top of my feed this morning and may be relevant here.

I am curious if maybe you were witnessing people of the Boomer generation (or older GenX) discussing this because they are more likely to be consuming mainstream broadcast news?

lol

It feels like the novelty of an attempted XPOTUS assassination wore off in less than 48 hours. That’s crazy.

Nobody around me is even talking about this anymore - not at work, not on social, not at the grocery store, nowhere.

Idk if that’s due to everyone being super jaded or because it’s Trump. If it’s because it’s him, then I wonder if it’s because nobody gives a shit about him or if it’s just not surprising someone would take a shot at him or just because it’s irrelevant to his candidacy or what else.

It’s a little spurious to compare dogs to humans in the way it’s described in this infographic.

It makes a lot of sense if dog owners keep their dogs in dog parks, where they only encounter dogs, and not childrens’ parks or really any public space where they may encounter kids.

If your dog’s personal space gets violated by a 2 year old and they bite the kid, then your dog deserves a swift extrajudicial death.

Animals just don’t have the same rights/protections and do not deserve to ever obtain them, imo. It does not help to project human rights onto dogs in the way this infographic does.

FatTony Search engine is it down or just me