Besides, boondoggle is fun. Some of those patterns are wild af.

This was the ELI5 version, and admittedly, network security isn’t my strong suit. Thank you for the correction.

Okay, the other comment was actually pretty funny. But this one’s a serious answer.

Transport Layer Security protocol is a way to share secrets. Basically, it’s the lock on your airport luggage. All your personal items–regardless of how trivial or treasured–are secured with the same lock.

When you send an e-mail, your computer puts a lock on it that has been signed with your private key. It’s sent to a recipient, who can unlock it with their own key. There’s a complicated exchange of keys and ciphers called a ‘handshake’ that happens when a website is loaded on your computer, or an e-mail is received. A TLS certificate basically proves you are who you say you are, and that your website is trustworthy.

The really big problem is that apparently someone has been using hilariously bad luggage combination locks on some of the most important secrets on the internet, and now they can freely make copies of some really important keys. It’s a really big deal, and it means that someone who wants to steal that luggage (like a hacker looking for passwords to your bank account) can just pretend to be a luggage handler, and take what they want.

Basically, someone who hasn’t quite realized they’re not entirely cis yet. “I thought everyone had dreams of being a boy/girl.” “I don’t get all that upset when I’m mistaken for a guy/girl on the phone.” “I don’t really feel comfortable hanging out with other guys/girls. It feels boring.”

Stuff like that. Other trans people can (usually) spot an egg a mile away. But like everything else in queerness, it’s never cut-and-dry, black-and-white, easily defined. They could always just be comfortable enough in their birth-assigned gender to not give a shit, and that’s valid.

It’s considered rude to assign this trait to someone you know personally, and the topic is only broached if the person in question chooses to be vulnerable and ask you specific questions about gender. Otherwise, they are (as always) your friend first, and treating them with care and respect always comes first.

The typical protocol when one of your friends says or does something a little ‘eggy’ is to quietly notice it, treat it neutrally and passively, and not say anything for or against it. Let them figure things out on their own. If they are trans, they know they can ask you things. If they aren’t, then they’re just happy and comfortable being themself around you. In either case, it’s not a bad thing.

Very 🥚

Or has egg vibes, and has been preemptively adopted by her soon-to-be girl gang.

Second this, flashing it with Debian and using it for KODI and maybe RetroArch is the way to go.

But I did those sorts of things with Sims as a release mechanism,

And there it is. That was all I needed to know.

Have a good one.

Exactly. It’s not a real, conscious living thing. But anyone who takes the time to program a machine to feel pain, and then comes up with creative ways to inflict that pain, is a bad person.

It’s the premeditated, deliberate, creative effort to hurt something that can provide negative feedback. The recipient obviously isn’t a real person. But the executor is a real person, making real choices. And I would bet you five bucks that they have personal relations (parents, friends, romantic partners) who’ve expressed concerns about similar behavior around real people.

I just gave you the answer.

The first house is designed by someone who knows the game well and is cutting out annoyances purely for QOL purposes. Ovens burn down the house and kill Sims, Sims drown in swimming pools, Sims wash dishes in bathroom sinks, and Sims wander off through any open door when you want them to stay put.

The second house is designed by someone who knows the game well and is playing it because they like torturing and killing their Sims. The entire floor plan is designed to kill, maim, and otherwise torment any cluster of variables unlucky enough to be trapped there.

Obviously, both players are making these decisions purely for their own enjoyment or comfort and the immersion of the game is inconsequential. No real people are hurt. However, the first player is making practical choices that make the game more functional. The second player is probably naming Sims after people who annoy them in real life and sticking them in the murder house.

Social behaviors are rehearsed in play. That’s Psych101. So, your turn. Would you say that the person who set up this experiment with these LLMs is capable of normal human empathy? Yes or no?

Okay, let’s set up a scenario, then.

You have two adults playing the Sims 4. One designs a house with only one exterior door, no oven, no sink in the bathroom, and no swimming pool. The other designs an open floor plan with no interior doors, no privacy in the restroom, ovens on every floor, and a backyard that’s nothing but one big swimming pool with just one ladder.

Which one is the psycho, and which one isn’t?

The people committing atrocities against hypothetical, imaginary people would do it to real, actual people for the exact same reasons if they had the same ability and impunity.

It’s the same broken empathy response, and it is still disturbing. One is orders of magnitude more significant, for obvious reasons. But I don’t like people who torture computers either.

Edit: If you think that I think you’re a bad person because you play Doom sometimes, or deleted the ladder on the swimming pool in Sims 4, relax. You’re not who I’m talking about.

I’m talking about sadists. Anyone who would take the time to design and build an experiment like this would probably do the same to mice, or monkeys, or even people. Sadists get their jollies off on the idea of inflicting pain, it’s why they enjoy games that let them make cruel decisions. Not everyone who plays violent video games is a sadist. Assuming that is ridiculous. But every sadist I’ve ever met has had at least one game where their save file could be used as evidence for mens rea in a domestic abuse trial.