>This is a useless, irrelevant, and fallacious thought-terminating cliche that you're using as an attempt to disguise the fact that you have presented no alternative - because you know I'll tear it to shreds if you do.
Once again, this kind of sentence show a total absence of will to go further than I/you mentality. A wider perspective is hard to achieve, if even possible, without putting the pretence of this/that personality. This is a path that seems as relevant as yelling at a computer when a software bug occurs. That might feel like a way to evacuate the frustration, but the computer won’t work better not matter what profanity is uttered (though it will never be bothered either, unlike fellow humans which have limited patience and have awareness of their own limited time to be alive).
>(an LLM comment doesn't count, because they lie and hallucinate, and it's not you responding)
LLM can certainly generate confabulations, but pretending they hallucinate or think is a lie. LLMs can also make totally sound output. Using a tool that can generate summary quickly doesn’t mean it voids the hand crafted answer that point to it.
It’s wise not taking LLMs output as a given regarding truth, but they certainly can be useful to point to considerations that can be falsified on one own preferred means.
>You can't even be bothered to try to think for yourself. "psychoslave" is an extremely apt name for your account.
Once again, this kind of attitude brings zero constructive contribution to the discussion. Everyone can be tired or have a bad day and push easily the "ad hominem" button. Hopefully that’s not an deeply engraved habit, and just taking some rest might be enough to step back and provide more positive prose in a near future.
>Oh, and there's the politics - you're not interested in debate, you're a propagandist. You're not arguing in good faith (if that wasn't clear enough from the LLM-generated responses, failure to make any sort of coherent argument, and not including a single actual alternative to money as a proxy for measuring value).
If anyone that disagrees with some premisses is disqualified of being a good faith debate participant, there is actually not much debate to hold, isn’t it?
> not including a single actual alternative to money as a proxy for measuring value
It makes manifest that this comment don’t take into account what was linked previously, so it’s better stop here, but for those interested in some other way to measure value and social systems:
Yeah, you have nothing, and the absolute drivel in the rest of your comment reflects that. These values are categorically not accepted as a proxy for value in any educated country.
Once again, this kind of sentence show a total absence of will to go further than I/you mentality. A wider perspective is hard to achieve, if even possible, without putting the pretence of this/that personality. This is a path that seems as relevant as yelling at a computer when a software bug occurs. That might feel like a way to evacuate the frustration, but the computer won’t work better not matter what profanity is uttered (though it will never be bothered either, unlike fellow humans which have limited patience and have awareness of their own limited time to be alive).
>(an LLM comment doesn't count, because they lie and hallucinate, and it's not you responding)
LLM can certainly generate confabulations, but pretending they hallucinate or think is a lie. LLMs can also make totally sound output. Using a tool that can generate summary quickly doesn’t mean it voids the hand crafted answer that point to it.
It’s wise not taking LLMs output as a given regarding truth, but they certainly can be useful to point to considerations that can be falsified on one own preferred means.
>You can't even be bothered to try to think for yourself. "psychoslave" is an extremely apt name for your account.
Once again, this kind of attitude brings zero constructive contribution to the discussion. Everyone can be tired or have a bad day and push easily the "ad hominem" button. Hopefully that’s not an deeply engraved habit, and just taking some rest might be enough to step back and provide more positive prose in a near future.
>Oh, and there's the politics - you're not interested in debate, you're a propagandist. You're not arguing in good faith (if that wasn't clear enough from the LLM-generated responses, failure to make any sort of coherent argument, and not including a single actual alternative to money as a proxy for measuring value).
If anyone that disagrees with some premisses is disqualified of being a good faith debate participant, there is actually not much debate to hold, isn’t it?
> not including a single actual alternative to money as a proxy for measuring value
It makes manifest that this comment don’t take into account what was linked previously, so it’s better stop here, but for those interested in some other way to measure value and social systems:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_National_Happiness
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09218...