Zahille7@Zahille7@lemmy.world

Replying to @⁨AmyAye@nord.pub⁩

Which is reinforced by the fact the Bible hardly ever brings up any other deities/gods besides God. You have your named Angels and such, but that’s not the same.

The more I hear about Christianity, despite going to church most of my youth, the more I realize I actually don’t really know that much (or may have forgotten it) about the religion’s lore aside from the Creation Myth.

Thorry@Thorry@feddit.org

Replying to @⁨Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world⁩

Meh I’d argue journalism has always been this way.

In the past it was more separated perhaps. We had the front page of the paper for breaking news, then the next few pages for in depth articles, there was the whole sports section etc. But there was often also a gossip section with news about celebs, there were the comics, general knowledge and background pieces and often fluff based on rumors. Some papers opted to be more serious and not include such things, often made by a printing house that also made straight up tabloids. Some papers focused exclusively on financial stuff for example. But even back then we also had our magazines and tabloids, some of better quality, most of lesser quality.

These days with websites it’s become more common to just have everything on the same website and have the users figure out what they want or don’t want to read. I’ve seen sites that usually post nothing but fluff and summaries of other peoples work, sometimes put out excellent articles with a lot of own research and sources. Often written by experts in their fields. But in order to fund those pieces, they need a lot of filler to keep the views and money coming in. Having just a little bit of info, like a rumor and writing an article about it has been an important skill since at least the 80s.

It’s easy to point out the lower quality as an example of how shit the world is, but I can tell you from first hand experience we had some shit journalism back in the 80s as well. There were certain kinds of newspapers that were known for that lower quality. What newspapers you were subscribed to said something about you as a person and your place in society. Often people who read only the serious stuff looked down on the common folk with their rag newspapers. And the people who read the more common papers looked at those people who only read the financial stuff for example as boring and stuffy.

ArcaneSlime@ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
edited

Replying to @⁨badgermurphy@lemmy.world⁩

Yup! Idk if we know who put it there, but either Paul Reubens or someone on his staff was one of us! Paul was apparently aware of us but idk if he was actually a dues paying member.

We also have David Byrne, two of Devo (Mark for sure and one of the Casales, I can’t remember which though), the voice of Dr. Kleiner from Half Life is a high ranking member (Dr. Hal), Burroughs joined (after he left scientology), there’s many more too but I’m drawing a blank right now, but we’ve got some titans of weird art for sure (perhaps unsurprisingly, for a satirical art collective cult from the 70s.)

MangoCats@MangoCats@feddit.it

Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

pledge allegiance to AI safety and undergo a psychological profiling test, per The Information.

And according to a rumor that, per The Spectator‘s Sean Thomas, is running rampant in Silicon Valley these days, some Anthropic engineers are going as far as to “worship” the company’s AI model Claude.

It would seem that the AI safety psych profiling test should be screening out / rejecting those who would give an AI “whatever it wants.”

yamper@yamper@piefed.social
edited

Replying to an earlier post

the Effective Altruists / Effective Accelerationists / Rationalists that started OpenAI and Anthropic are cult members anyways. Rolling Stone reported this in 2024. WIRED reported about the murderous sect in 2025.

the guy who made the rounds last week about the 10% chance of killing us is one of the key figures in the Rationalist movement. his fear is stemmed in religious fervor, not socioeconomic equity.

these people have always been deeply unwell.

agit68@agit68@lemmy.zip
edited

Replying to @⁨1984@lemmy.today⁩

I think of the 90’s as us trying to continue the optimism and work that was put in during the 60’s to create a more egalitarian society, while having some of the wild of the 70’s and trying to recover from Reaganism of the 80’s. And not having the daily threat of nuclear annihilation. While allowing the rise of unbridled corporatism.

While Clinton did a lot of work to balance the budget and had the debt paid off, he also passed the telecommunications act of 93 that allowed consolidation of media. Namely I heart radio.

Before him cable providers were required to allow public access, and only 1 owner of a single am/fm (pick one.) station with 1 television station in a market.

Now you have Sinclair as a direct result.

melfie@melfie@lemmy.zip
edited

Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

I never wondered whether I was talking to anything approaching a divine being due to the number of mistakes. However, there have been points in the past with cloud models where I wondered whether I was actually talking to a human somewhere being paid a pittance to pretend to be AI. I self-host LLMs nowadays and am fairly confident there’s no human on the other end of OpenCode, but in the early days of cloud LLMs, I wouldn’t put it past them.

fruitycoder@fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
edited

Replying to @⁨return2ozma@lemmy.world⁩

AI development has a few factions. People that want to make and fuck their AI daughter/girlfriend. Researchers that want to underatand the basis of the human mind. Capitalists that want to convert human intelligence into capital they can fully own (slavery is the first attempt). Then finally cultists that want to make God in their image.

It’s a crazy field for someone that is fascinated by thinking about thinking and want to make useful little tools.