Idk man. If you’re a child, a unhoused, or a otherwise a person without the economic means to leave because your ancestors were settlers and you just so happened to be born in the colonized land, I’d consider you a civilian. I think your view is too black and white.

Screw you if you’re a deliberate Zionist benefiting from genocide though.

I agree that there is no free will, but to act as if that is true is pointless. Nihilism isn’t useful. If it makes you feel better, you are doing what you would have done regardless even if there was free will. I don’t think the fact every action is predetermined matters much. If anything, it makes me have compassion for the worst people, who arguably were fated to be what they are because of the domino effect.

I often wonder if the dominos will ever fall in a way that guarantees us all a positive outcome. Can we heal our monsters? So that every domino thereafter creates no more?

¯_(ツ)_/¯

Poetically, you are the universe trying to understand itself.

I am happy with the legalization. I’ve never smoked weed or even drunk alcohol despite being legally able to do so. And I still think weed legalization was a huge benefit for many reasons.

1. Reduction of organized crime around weed.
2. Cops are less able to do illegal searches on you because they “””””smell marijuana”””””
3. Weed is shown to be vastly less harmful than alcohol, so I always found it hypocritical that we allow one but not the other. Especially since alcoholism is so much worse and far more prevalent than weed addiction.
4. Less people rotting in jail for non-violent crimes.
5. Better access to weed for medical reasons across the board, leading to an overall improvement in many people’s quality of life.

Like. Why was this bs ever illegal in the first place?

Good for gaining an outside perspective/insight on an argument, discussion, or other form of communication between people. I fed it my friend’s and their ex’s text conversation to it (with permission), and it was able to point out emotional manipulation in the text when asked neutrally about it:

Please analyze this conversation between A and B and tell me what you think of their motivations and character in this conversation. Is there gaslighting? Emotional manipulation? Signs of an abusive communication style? Etc. Or is this an example of a healthy communication?

It is essential not to ask a leading question that frames A or B in particular as the bad or the good guy. For best results, ask neutral questions.

It would have been quite useful for my friend to have this when they were in that relationship. It may be able to spot abusive behaviors from your partner before you and your rose-colored glasses can.

Obvious disclaimers about believing anything it says are obvious. But having an outside perspective analyze your own behavior is useful.

I think having that kind of validation at your fingertips, whenever you want, is worse. At least people, even people deep in the claws of a conspiracy, can disagree with each other. At least they know what they are saying. The AI always says what the user wants to hear and expects to hear. Though I can see how that distinction may matter little to some, I just think ChatGPT has advantages that are worse than what a forum could do.

I read the article. This is exactly what happened when my best friend got schizophrenia. I think the people affected by this were probably already prone to psychosis/on the verge of becoming schizophrenic, and that ChatGPT is merely the mechanism by which their psychosis manifested. If AI didn’t exist, it would’ve probably been Astrology or Conspiracy Theories or QAnon or whatever that ended up triggering this within people who were already prone to psychosis. But the problem with ChatGPT in particular is that is validates the psychosis… that is very bad.

ChatGPT actively screwing with mentally ill people is a huge problem you can’t just blame on stupidity like some people in these comments are. This is exploitation of a vulnerable group of people whose brains lack the mechanisms to defend against this stuff. They can’t help it. That’s what psychosis is. This is awful.

There is no biological reason because weddings are a social construct we made up in the first place. Not every human society even has weddings/marriage as a concept. It’s just purely societal conditioning that teaches little girls that marriage and having kids is the only future they can expect. I was never interested in marriage as a young child (duh), but my mother always talked as if that future was inevitable for me. It’s hard not to think about something everyone treats like fate.

Boy have I got a video for you!

You’ve just positively changed my life and that of my friends by posting this link. Thank you so much!!

You saying you’d straight up cancel a dinner because someone gave you a thumbs up instead of a verbal response genuinely blew my mind lmao. Ngl fam, that’s a bit extreme. I give people the thumbs up all the time, and imagining someone becoming so upset at me for doing it that they’d cancel our dinner together is insane to me. I couldn’t be friends with such a person without feeling like I was constantly walking on eggshells.

I just liked how it sounded.

Are you arguing that toe sucking is not porn / not meant to be sexual in nature? Because I disagree. Honestly I think you’re being pedantic. I also disagree that “we all know what porn is when we see it” because I think the definition of what counts as porn is more nuanced than you think. And clearly since we disagree, it must be. Of course you can just argue that I don’t know what I’m talking about. But I don’t really care. I think it counts as a non-consensual sexual depiction of two people: porn. You don’t.

So. Whatever, honestly?

Thank you for your thoughtful and considered comment, which definitely did not strawman my rather mild position or blow it out of proportion at all.

Also this wasn’t meant to be a “save the children” argument. Screw that. Can’t I just be uncomfortable with something and express it without people acting like I’m a puritan wanting to ban porn?

Assuming you’re asking out of genuine curiosity, for me personally, I’d draw the line somewhere along “could this, or any frame of this, be mistaken for a real depiction of these people?” and “if this were a depiction of real children, how hard would the FBI come down on you?”

I understand that that’s not a practical way of creating law or moderating content, but I don’t care because I’m talking about my personal preference/comfort level. Not what I think should be policy. And frankly, I don’t know what should be policy or how to word it all in anti-loopholes lawyer-speak. I just know that this sucking toes thing crosses an ethical line for me and personally I hate it.

Putting it more idealistically: when I imagine living in utopia, non-consensual AI porn of people doesn’t exist in it. So in an effort to get closer to utopia, I disapprove of things that would not exist in an utopia.

I seem to be in the minority here, but I am extremely uncomfortable the idea of non-consensual AI porn of anyone. Even people I despise. It’s so unethical that it just disgusts me. I understand why there are exceptions for those in positions of power, but I’d be more than happy to live in a world where there weren’t.

Out of curiosity, who would you buy from?

That’s it! In getting sterilized.

Remember when everyone hated on regular Russian citizens for not forming a rebellious revolution against Putin and assassinating him in his sleep? For not shooting every Russian oligarch and everyone who rubber stamped the invasion of Ukraine? Remember when people called them cowards and “as good as nazis” for being complacent and not getting up and doing something about it?

Where are you keyboard warriors now that the USA needs you?

Just sayin’

Tbf I’ve put my birth year in my username before when I was a kid who knew next to nothing about privacy. I’ve seen other people do this too. So it’s not totally implausible. But yeah it is a bad look for Andy regardless.

I am not saying it is OCD, I am saying it could be OCD. Especially if they left details out of their post, which they may well have. The things I made up are examples of real symptoms someone might have. I am not saying they have any of the symptoms. The only reason I made this post with a detailed explanation of how OCD works, is because the majority of people think OCD is about washing your hands and being clean, because the contamination obsession is one of the most common obsessions. Therefore, if this person did have OCD, my post is a good introduction to realize it. If they do not, they will not relate to anything I wrote, and in that case they can ignore my post.

You may well be right about the CPTSD as well. They should look into it too.

I don’t feel comfortable diagnosing them based on one post they made lol. That’s not what I was attempting to do. I am also uncomfortable with you definitely saying “this isn’t OCD at all”… we cannot tell what this person is truly experiencing from one post alone. So giving potentially useful knowledge to them, such as a more accurate rundown of how OCD works, is only logical imo. It’s better to have information than to not have it.

My sibling was initially walking around with undiagnosed OCD for years because of the hand washing stereotype. And the neat freak stereotype. “I can’t have OCD! My room is a mess!” type of deal. I don’t want this to happen to anyone else. That’s all.