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.)
Ported over from previous thread
Recently made the discovery of a website called AI 2027 tracker which grades the predictions of AI 2027 independent of the authors.
The way they grade these predictions is odd, 80% accuracy is for some reason “confirmed accurate” and “partially accurate” which is bizarre.
The website also shows a consistent degradation of accuracy over time which is funny
EDIT:ok so they do have a grading criteria, 100% is “highly accurate/confirmed accurate” and 80% is supposed to be “largely accurate”. For some reason they don’t include this on the timeline grading? it’s either confirmed or partially accurate, so it’s still weird