Did you respond to the wrong comment? Because I’m having trouble imagining what you could possibly be referring to

RRR is fantastic

I have been looking for something like this for ages. I could kiss you rn 😘

The carbon-silicate cycle. I suggest everyone watch The Deadliest Pattern in Nature on youtube.

TIL letting my teacher make suggestions on my draft means they control the entire contents of the final paper

I feel like a lot of people are taking the post too literally (or maybe I’m not). I once knew a girl who posted a photo of her dad watching football on a plane captioned “Persian dads really need their football lol” and it’s like. That’s just a universal dad thing. Lots of dads in every culture do that.

Some people just do not think about cultures outside their own. Like, at all.

Honestly, it doesn’t look like AI to me. Funnily enough I think it’s exactly what the other reply said and it’s just badly photoshopped text on an existing image. But I do think their reasons for thinking it’s real are pretty terrible, and I still think the things I listed are sus, as they don’t look like typical artifacting to me.

In particular the detail on the ceiling in the background is quite clear and the spacing between the lights is consistent, and most other details seem to check out (the guy’s watch and clothes, people and stands in the background, veins on their hands, etc).

As a whole I would say it looks a bit uncanny just because of their poses and facial expressions, plus the weird design of the sign.

From left to right:

1. The pattern on the tie is nonsensical and quite noisy

2. The edge of the sign above and below the man’s arm is discontinuous. It’s parallel but it “breaks”

3. The man’s ring is constricting the fuck out of his finger, and is also slightly offset from the finger’s position and angle

4. Same as 2 but horizontally

The community is called “de-amazon”. It’s fine to say “bezos bad” but there’s plenty that the community could do beyond that.

Amazon and brick-and-mortar big box stores killed a lot of small businesses, and now online shopping is the only way to go for a lot of items, especially niche stuff.

Here are some ideas for actual useful posts in a community called “de-amazon”:

Here are the best sites for all your cookware needs

Anyone know some reputable sites to buy drone parts?

How to make diy x so you don’t have to buy it!

But who cares about community and information-sharing anyway.

I’ve seen some word that Trump probably just thinks Mamdani is using “fascist” as a political pejorative - in the same way republicans call their political opponents “communists” or “radical left socialists”.

Garbage ragebait

They are indicative of something. That something is just not always “this project is good”.

Nuh uhh!!1!

Ah yes, all the benefits of having the privilege to pay $10 a month to play online, only have enough storage space for like 5 games with no expansion options, barred access to the vast majority of games, and limited options for voice chat and input devices.

But I guess if you’re like 12 and all you play is 2k/madden/fifa/maybe COD and your parents are paying for it then it’s probably fine.

Also anything with tapioca pearls/other mix-ins

Pretty sure those were referencing the original grey goo thought experiment

Well yeah like I said, of course different people are gonna have different standards. A scientist will look at evidence very differently from a conspiracy nut, and reaching them requires vastly different approaches.

Fair enough. However, I was under the interpretation that evidence remains the same either way; it is the way it is presented that affects the likelihood of someone changing their mind. Presenting the evidence by itself may have a small chance at a positive effect, while including proper rhetoric lowers the negative and increases positive chance.

Therefore evidence should always be presented “correctly” to avoid setbacks, and the takeaways are thus functionally identical.

I mean I get your point, and I’m sure it’s more nuanced than this and depends on a whole host of other factors like whether it’s a politically charged topic (deoxygenated blood being blue vs HRT actually working), emotional state, connection to other core beliefs (like religious ones), etc. some or all of which are mentioned in the study.

Like I’m sure for topics that aren’t really important, just presenting the correct fact is enough to adjust most people’s view, unless they are particularly stubborn. Like saying “peeing on a jellyfish sting doesn’t really help actually” will usually be met with “oh, huh, I didn’t know that”. But even something as simple as saying “the earth isn’t flat” will make some people very angry. Start listing facts for a more complex topic like climate change, economics, or sociology and people will absolutely double down on whatever black-and-white viewpoint they already hold.

But yeah sure enough, they shouldn’t have used an absolute qualifier I guess.

I remember a study being referenced that claimed to show introducing facts contrary to a person’s existing viewpoint don’t get them to change, it just made them double-down and be more defensive.

To be fair, this is exactly what they said. Facts alone are not enough - you need rhetoric. So, not misinformation.

L ragebait