kghawes.bsky.social
Cat lover, feminist, vtuber fan, math educator
hawesthoughts.com
140 posts
35 followers
17 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Specifically: “it’s beneficial for them,” “they’re not the same as you and me,” “it’s their natural state,” “it’s what they want,” etc. It’s priming children to be receptive to these arguments (possibly unintentionally).
comment in response to
post
The problem is that slavery is a real thing in both the past and present and people are actively trying to convince others that it’s okay. If not for that context it wouldn’t be a big deal. It’s very similar to actual arguments made about black slaves in America.
comment in response to
post
That message could have been conveyed in a million ways that don’t involve endorsing slavery
comment in response to
post
It’s referring in part to legal safeguards with respect to your actual gender. So if you are a man and you are denied access to men’s spaces that’s the same as a woman being excluded from women’s spaces. In an ideal world we wouldn’t focus on gender so much in policy (because we wouldn’t need to).
comment in response to
post
What did I say you said? Can you clarify how I am being abusive? I think there was a misunderstanding. Also I don’t blame anyone, that’s not the point.
comment in response to
post
My life is in jeopardy too. I’m not trying to convince you personally, you do you. I do believe there would be significantly less immediate threat to my or your safety if Harris had been elected.
But, electoral politics won’t lead to improvement.
comment in response to
post
Poe's Law is wild, ain't it?
comment in response to
post
Not by voting, either for or against Democrats, nor by refusing to vote either. You’re fooling yourself if you think the Democrats will ever listen. We need something different, not a better Democratic Party. That work should take priority, and voting D is something we do for the short term.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, makes me wonder why I should be gendered at all.
comment in response to
post
It’s literally the lesser of two evils. Voting isn’t the long term solution, as we would first need candidates that represent people’s interests. But it can prevent a greater harm in the short term.
comment in response to
post
But this isn't about what parties should have done, it's about what eligible non-voters should have done. People had enough information before the election to know broadly what would happen if Trump got elected.
comment in response to
post
He has no clue how disease or immunity works
comment in response to
post
I believe there are many, many men who have committed SH or SA who genuinely believe they did not because in their mind what they did was completely fine. It's a twisted and dehumanizing perspective that comes from growing up around misogynistic messages and internalizing them. Basically we're F'ed.
comment in response to
post
There was a high school that did that exact same thing in the 2000s, and my brother (white) played a minor role. What's crazy is that ABC or someone made a TV documentary about it.
I think it was a publicity stunt by the theatre director who wanted to present it as some kind of edgy casting choice.
comment in response to
post
It's hard, the ableist narrative is loud and ever present
comment in response to
post
Oh, the response I was replying to was deleted anyway.
Being particular about how words are used in everyday speech is one thing, if we want to have a serious discussion about something controversial we need to define the central concepts. All math, science, and philosophy begin with defining terms
comment in response to
post
Can you clarify what "riding semantics" means to you?
comment in response to
post
I mean… historically… there was that one guy…
comment in response to
post
A neural net doesn’t work the way neurons work. It’s a bit like calling data storage “memory”. It’s analogous in a meaningful way, but those two things are not similar in how they work.
comment in response to
post
No I agree it’s a scale. LLMs are “just math” in a way biological brains are not. They are physically different in important ways. You could in principle compute the output of an LLM with pencil and paper. It’s literally not different from a calculator. Also “neural net” is just an analogy.
comment in response to
post
You know, “AI” doesn’t really mean anything. It’s not a type of algorithm or a type of program. LLMs are just technology. Tech isn’t inherently good or bad, but it can have good and bad consequences. Most technologies have both. Panic around AI is a mix of real concerns and misinformed narratives.
comment in response to
post
Hatred of Catholics among American WASPS was pretty brutal back in the day, though not nearly as intense by JFK's time I think.
comment in response to
post
Really most human behavior is predictable, and that doesn't have anything to do with intelligence. Patterned behavior reduces the workload for the brain and behaving predictably is essential for dealing with other people.
comment in response to
post
There have been several times when just by carefully formulating a prompt I figured out the answer myself. I could have done that with a pencil and paper, but I didn't really think to do it before.
comment in response to
post
Not exactly. Panpsychism aside, we can infer with some confidence that certain things are not conscious, like a stone. By that standard, LLMs are certainly not conscious. They fundamentally don’t work differently from other programs. It’s just math at the end of the day, just a lot of it very fast.
comment in response to
post
Unlike AI and big data, machine learning does actually mean something in computer science
comment in response to
post
It is a genuine advancement, but it’s not a new advancement. Neural nets have existed for decades and they’re based on mathematical concepts that are much older. To the public it seems like things happened suddenly but these technologies have been developed gradually.
comment in response to
post
And I mean “you” you. I’m not being cheeky or misleading, I mean people who are assigned female at birth who look female TO YOU may not have XX chromosomes.
comment in response to
post
That contradicts how most people have historically used the terms male and female. Chromosomes are correlated with sex but are neither necessary nor sufficient for determining sex. Your definition would lead to many people having no defined sex or whose sex is the opposite of what you would think.
comment in response to
post
I don’t understand how you can’t understand that I’m asking for specific information. Yes, I gathered that you were referring to X and Y chromosomes, but what *exactly* does that have to do with sex in your mind? Again it seems like you don’t know yourself what you mean. Unless you explain I’m out.
comment in response to
post
You can just say you don't care to answer the question if you don't care to answer, I don't know why this running around is necessary.
comment in response to
post
This is the most detail you've offered so far, and it is paltry. DNA is one example of what? What does DNA have to do with sex in your understanding?
When you say sex dictates male or female, are you saying your sex is not male or female but rather these are separate things? One dictates the other?
comment in response to
post
That doesn’t answer my question because I don’t know what your understanding of biology is and your second sentence isn’t really saying much. Every organism is “biologically different” from every other organism, so what? I’m very clearly asking you for specific details and have been from the start.
comment in response to
post
I don’t know what the answer is, and your refusal to elaborate makes me start to suspect you don’t know what you mean either. Again I’m not asking for a definition, I’m asking what you specifically mean in this specific context. It’s literally a simple clarifying question.
comment in response to
post
Sorry that isn’t sufficiently specific for me to know the precise meaning you are using. It seems like you’re being intentionally vague to avoid saying anything that could be refuted. Instead of defending yourself rhetorically, consider having a genuine conversation. I’m not attacking you.
comment in response to
post
You’re getting off topic, I asked for clarification on what you mean when you say “sex”
comment in response to
post
I forgot about that, that’s a whole other can of worms
comment in response to
post
I asked you what you meant, not what the definition is. People use words differently and use words to mean different things in different contexts. “Woman” is not a technical term and is not well-defined in a logical sense. In general, it refers adult humans who belong to a certain gender.
comment in response to
post
To be fair, your genes are not your fault and you don’t get to choose which genes to pass on.
comment in response to
post
The idea of neurodiversity is gaining some traction, I think.
I certainly think about things differently from neurotypical people and it’s helped me solve problems my colleagues weren’t able to.
I do also get confused sometimes because I seem to lack context for what people say which is annoying.
comment in response to
post
But progressive and leftists in the US don’t like the Democratic Party and don’t see it as a progressive party. How do you reconcile that?