Oh that's not a fuckup in my book!

You're already doing what a good moderator separates you one from an average one: engage, explain and adapt!

I appreciate that! And moderating topics like these is frankly nearly impossible as it's a clash of science and "moral".

My gist is simple: NSFW is literally: "would you mind a coworker seeing you looking at this?". After all marking something as NSFW is a form of self censorship: "I recommend you not looking at this at work!".

From this I deduce two things: a) text should have a higher barrier for NSFW than images. Other people need to actively read what you're looking at and it's way harder to claim that text is not workplace appropriate compared to a picture of primary sedual organs. b) What's actually depicted and said? The Wikipedia page about human reproduction falls at least at my workplace not under NSFW although a penis is clearly depicted.

Now to the OP: it's an article discussion the struggle of sex workers (well promotion of a book about it but same same). The issue here is that marking articles like these as NSFW perpetuates the core issue of the content discussed: that this is a woman problem that should be talked about in private.

I guess that's where the majority of downvotes come from as well: "this should not be viewed in the workplace" is a catastrophic signal in this context for the message.

Now to your point of respectdirectly: OP doesn't disrespect the people who filter out NSFW content because this article should be visible and even discussed in professional contexts if we as human society want to progress. It's source is a newspaper, it's content socially relevant and aimed at (provocatively!) educating and it's topic is sadly very relevant.

All of this is my personal opinion of course but I wanted to leave you with more than just a two word comment!

This is the exact headline of an established newspaper. Wherever you're allowed to have your phone or for reading at work then this should be just as fine.

Please be consience on what NSFW should be and don't call for censorship in its name.

Ironically fitting to the article itself.

Yeah but that's - to be clear - bullshit distraction talk. That's not "people" as in many folks, that's politicians distracting from the difficult discussions (i.e. Inflation) and trying to rile up people. At least in my social bubble it didn't work - it was mocked a bit and then forgotten.

That is not how these LLM work though - it generates responses literally token for token (think "word for word") based on the context before.

I can still write prompts where the answer sounds emotional because that's what the reference data sounded like. Doesn't mean there is anything like consciousness in there... That's why it's so hard: we've defined consciousness (with self awareness) in a way that is hard to test. Most books have these parts where the reader is touched e emotionally by a character after all.

It's still purely a chat bot - but a damn good one. The conclusion: we can't evaluate language models purely based on what they write.

So how do we determine consciousness then? That's the impossible task: don't use only words for an object that is only words.

Personally I don't think the difference matters all that much to be honest. To dive into fiction: in terminator, skynet could be described as conscious as well as obeying an order like: "prevent all future wars".

We as a species never used consciousness (ravens, dolphins?) to alter our behavior.

Is there anything to support this? I couldn't find anything that really has this intend documented and Intel weren't the only on pushing for usb as the most simple protocol possible ( I recall a lot of excitement about the "u" part.. How naive at least I was back then!).

I'm not knowledgeable enough to really argue against it, looking simply from an Okham point of view as "they wanted everything to connect" - the printer in the same way as that PDA.... Plus Intels de facto (IT) world domination at the time it just seems unlikely.

Edit: some sentences didn't make even less sense, fixed.

Two more things to add: you get downvoted not for the content but for the tone. People tend to not respond well to abuse, even if verbal - and at least I read a "make this shit work for me" in between your lines.

And more important: what you are asking is not easy. Wouldn't be on windows, wouldn't be on macos (disclaimer: I've never set up the arr stack on either but docker runtimes) . You are diving into server software no matter if you're the only user or not. Either you accept this and the learning curve ahead of you or you give up on it.

Not sure how to do spoilers so I stay vague l:

Herbert picked up the water topic in later books and showed what happened to the Fremen as well.

I agree that it was hope that was very clearly - in the beginning.

Nicht jede Ehe ist ein boomer clichés.

tar

Done. That's a valid command, no error code, nothing. KISS!

Way lower production value but way shorter and to the point:

https://youtu.be/E4Y6an37OOM?si=QGvrVebo37piqOFn

Tldr: not really. Even a fucked up nozzle still prints. But if you're min maxing all parts than the nozzle should be on that list.

Wait why are complaining about the stupid devices of others instead of your one that doesn't allow you to manage its connections?

I would be furious at my stuff doing stupid shit not that of others.