masterspace

You can also really feel that the algorithm doesn't just blindly promote click/rage bait the way that reddit's does.

It still gets promoted some times, but the front page isn't constantly filled with it like Reddit's is,.

Way more arguments on Lemmy seem to end with the two users stop down voting each other, and then basically concluding 'that I see your point but still think you're wrong because youre over emphasizing x or y'.

Way more arguments on Reddit just end with an endless loop of insulting and talking past each other.

I think the effect is probably like 30% selection bias of people coming to Lemmy more intentionally, and 70% lack of bots. Between paid influence campaigns, and Reddit's own use of bots to juice engagement, my gut feel is that most of those endless arguments are either directly arguments with bots, or indirectly people who have grown so frustrated arguing with bots in other threads that they're no longer capable of rational discussion.

Also, Reddit comment quality has nosedived in the past year or so. Like, wildly nosedived. It used to be that there would be at least one comment in the top comments that adds some more interesting context to the story, these days, I almost t never see that on Reddit, but frequently do on Lemmy.

My guess would be that they need those shafts smooth, but if the outside is smooth it doesn't matter as much?

That's usually time to do something else.

It would be hard to name a bad thing that cant be linked to capitalism.

Yes, so then maybe the problem is with capitalism, not with new technology.

This is a real "everywhere I poke hurts" ... "Yeah, cause your finger is broken", situation.

The argument you presented in your last comment wasnt 'whether it does more harm than good', but 'whether it can do more harm than good'.

If you want to talk about whether LLMs actually do more harm than good in the present world, then I would challenge you to name an ill effect that's the result of LLMs and not the result of capitalism.

Technology, be it physical, or computer based, has been automating people out of jobs literally since jump. You can either vainly fight technical progress or you can fight for a system that shares the rewards from that progress.

The same argument can be made about computers or the internet or government or schools or speeches or...

In my experience this, and running red lights, is more of an American phenomena than one inherent to cars

I literally use LLMs every day at work to help me code, and yes they are great, even for senior engineers who know what they're doing, it's like using intellisense or something like resharper on steroids.

Copilot Web, which is just combining Bing's substandard search engine with LLMs, has made it genuinely more useful and accurate than Google.

Capitalism, wildly uneven distribution of societal resources, and exploitation all suck, but what LLMs can do on a technical level is pretty wild and would be universally praised if it weren't for the job loss implications.

Yeah, it 100% is. Im guessing that the difference for me being out of shape to me being in shape was like 2 point difference on the 10 point attractiveness scale, and there's a night and day difference with how people treated me.

A bit of that is just being naturally more confident when I'm in shape and better looking, but even outside of that there was still how everyone treated me, even before I interacted with them. And that's everyone, from romantic options, to colleague, to random strangers, to close friends, to family.

The first time I got in really good shape I actually got really depressed for a while because of how much better people treated me just because of how I looked.... Though of course even then, it was easier to come out of a depression when you're in shape and everyone wants to fuck you.

More accurate meme:

Also, tabloid journalism predates magazines.

Some of the replacement stuff is bad, but some is good. I personally get more out of my favourite podcasters going in depth on their feelings on a game than I get out of whoever is running reviews at IGN right now.

Like even in movies, pre-youtube, pre-social media, people flocked to individual reviewers they liked, more so than publications. It's why Roger and Ebert / Siskel got so huge, people agreed with their tastes, trusted them, and sought them out specifically. That's not that different from today's world of following your preferred YouTuber or podcaster, but rather than everyone following the few individual who can publish, you end up with a giant web of individuals following and influencing each other's opinions.

And to be clear, I think games reviewing has merit and value, it's just that outside of reviewing and technical analysis, there's not much in the way of stories to cover on a regular basis. So you end up with dedicated games journalists having to write about tripe half the time just to fill word / article counts.