@ckrss.bsky.social
Let me help you.
1. Screenshot - don't act like that. Universally annoying and cringe. *whispers* lol jesus
2. Your Cishet White Boy Super Ally efforts are really transparent. Your posts couldn't look more calculated. That's why your engagement never increases.
1. Screenshot - don't act like that. Universally annoying and cringe. *whispers* lol jesus
2. Your Cishet White Boy Super Ally efforts are really transparent. Your posts couldn't look more calculated. That's why your engagement never increases.
April 25, 2025 at 11:05 AM
Let me help you.
1. Screenshot - don't act like that. Universally annoying and cringe. *whispers* lol jesus
2. Your Cishet White Boy Super Ally efforts are really transparent. Your posts couldn't look more calculated. That's why your engagement never increases.
1. Screenshot - don't act like that. Universally annoying and cringe. *whispers* lol jesus
2. Your Cishet White Boy Super Ally efforts are really transparent. Your posts couldn't look more calculated. That's why your engagement never increases.
We've been talking this entire time about my specific use case. We're not debating issues people have "writ large." And you know that. Being wrong is fine. Moving the goalposts and insulting people instead of acknowledging it isn't, imo.
Can you rewrite this so it's better for me specifically?
Can you rewrite this so it's better for me specifically?
April 25, 2025 at 6:02 AM
We've been talking this entire time about my specific use case. We're not debating issues people have "writ large." And you know that. Being wrong is fine. Moving the goalposts and insulting people instead of acknowledging it isn't, imo.
Can you rewrite this so it's better for me specifically?
Can you rewrite this so it's better for me specifically?
Hey why did you quote Karoline Leavitt when you know that she's a pathological liar?
April 25, 2025 at 2:43 AM
Hey why did you quote Karoline Leavitt when you know that she's a pathological liar?
What if someone can't bother to carefully read a 192 character reply?
Don't worry, so far no one has had a problem with me reading summaries generated by my *local* model to determine which *emails to read now vs later*.
Don't worry, so far no one has had a problem with me reading summaries generated by my *local* model to determine which *emails to read now vs later*.
April 24, 2025 at 5:42 AM
What if someone can't bother to carefully read a 192 character reply?
Don't worry, so far no one has had a problem with me reading summaries generated by my *local* model to determine which *emails to read now vs later*.
Don't worry, so far no one has had a problem with me reading summaries generated by my *local* model to determine which *emails to read now vs later*.
From what I've read, it sounds like ChatGPT can now access WaPo articles to summarize, pull quotes etc. That's not what's being utilized in the screenshot - it's just relying on its training data, which is why it's so inaccurate.
Anthropic's LLM does the same thing and it doesn't have a WaPo deal.
Anthropic's LLM does the same thing and it doesn't have a WaPo deal.
April 22, 2025 at 10:47 PM
From what I've read, it sounds like ChatGPT can now access WaPo articles to summarize, pull quotes etc. That's not what's being utilized in the screenshot - it's just relying on its training data, which is why it's so inaccurate.
Anthropic's LLM does the same thing and it doesn't have a WaPo deal.
Anthropic's LLM does the same thing and it doesn't have a WaPo deal.
What is he even implying here? Like even if he's just saying "don't partner with scumbags," what about every other company that uses Chatgpt?
April 22, 2025 at 7:53 PM
What is he even implying here? Like even if he's just saying "don't partner with scumbags," what about every other company that uses Chatgpt?
It's brown when his thumb is behind it.
April 21, 2025 at 10:36 PM
It's brown when his thumb is behind it.
It's almost like water can appear to be the color of whatever is behind it
April 21, 2025 at 4:18 PM
It's almost like water can appear to be the color of whatever is behind it
No we should definitely listen to Tom who has a history of normal very smart insight
April 21, 2025 at 8:05 AM
No we should definitely listen to Tom who has a history of normal very smart insight
Show this screenshot to people and ask them who "ya'll" refers to:
1. Elizabeth and the group she's in
2. Not Elizabeth, but "a group of people including those making similar dumbass arguments as her"
1. Elizabeth and the group she's in
2. Not Elizabeth, but "a group of people including those making similar dumbass arguments as her"
April 21, 2025 at 12:15 AM
Show this screenshot to people and ask them who "ya'll" refers to:
1. Elizabeth and the group she's in
2. Not Elizabeth, but "a group of people including those making similar dumbass arguments as her"
1. Elizabeth and the group she's in
2. Not Elizabeth, but "a group of people including those making similar dumbass arguments as her"
No, it's not "hard to follow." You said you saw it on NBC. It's literally right there. What "noise" made this so impossible to see?
That wasn't a mistake, it was a choice.
That wasn't a mistake, it was a choice.
April 18, 2025 at 3:24 PM
No, it's not "hard to follow." You said you saw it on NBC. It's literally right there. What "noise" made this so impossible to see?
That wasn't a mistake, it was a choice.
That wasn't a mistake, it was a choice.
I actually never do this. Look how profoundly stupid my first reply was. This was not planned. Regarding the lodge pan, yeah maybe but trying not to get my hopes up
April 17, 2025 at 3:34 AM
I actually never do this. Look how profoundly stupid my first reply was. This was not planned. Regarding the lodge pan, yeah maybe but trying not to get my hopes up
Just being a normal warrior
April 17, 2025 at 1:48 AM
Just being a normal warrior
I'll be glad to elaborate but why did you post the definition of this word after that particular reply? It would be helpful if you would just communicate normally instead of the weird passive aggressive snarky nonsense. It's uninteresting and a waste of time.
April 15, 2025 at 2:26 AM
I'll be glad to elaborate but why did you post the definition of this word after that particular reply? It would be helpful if you would just communicate normally instead of the weird passive aggressive snarky nonsense. It's uninteresting and a waste of time.
one of the worst cases I've seen, wishing her well
April 6, 2025 at 9:35 PM
one of the worst cases I've seen, wishing her well
Saying "pay attention" to people who are already mad at you for not paying attention, just incredible political instincts
April 5, 2025 at 12:32 AM
Saying "pay attention" to people who are already mad at you for not paying attention, just incredible political instincts
It's not the same as being disingenuous tho. And if someone says, "why do you say it's performative?" The answer is, "Because doing X benefits the cause, but Y benefits his image." It's not circular.
The dictionary definition is what people mean.
The dictionary definition is what people mean.
April 1, 2025 at 7:37 PM
It's not the same as being disingenuous tho. And if someone says, "why do you say it's performative?" The answer is, "Because doing X benefits the cause, but Y benefits his image." It's not circular.
The dictionary definition is what people mean.
The dictionary definition is what people mean.
Oh I see, you're incapable of arguing in good faith. Never mind!
March 27, 2025 at 12:52 AM
Oh I see, you're incapable of arguing in good faith. Never mind!
I don't remember what the blocked post said
March 26, 2025 at 10:28 PM
I don't remember what the blocked post said