Want to wade into the snowy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid.

Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

  • mirrorwitch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Ars Technica published a story about that nonsense of a github bot “posting” on its “blog” about human developers having rejected its “contributions” to matplotlib.

    Ars Technica quote developer Scott Shambaugh extensively, like:

    “As autonomous systems become more common, the boundary between human intent and machine output will grow harder to trace,” Shambaugh wrote. “Communities built on trust and volunteer effort will need tools and norms to address that reality.”

    If you find that to be long-winded inanity, yep, you guessed it: Shambaugh never said that, the Ars Technica article itself is random chatbot output, and his “quotes” are all made up.

    https://infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/116065340523529645

    Ars Technica has removed the article, but mittaggart (linked above) saved a copy: https://mttaggart.neocities.org/ars-whoopsie