

Hey, congratulations on the employment!


Hey, congratulations on the employment!


That’s a bit difficult because I already go into anything from The Onion knowing it’s intended to be humorous/satirical.
What I lack in ability to recognize satire or outright deception from posts written online, I make up for by reading comment threads: seeing people accuse things of being fake, seeing people defend it as true, seeing people point out the entire intention of a website is satire, seeing people who had a joke go over their heads get it explained… relying on the collective hivemind to help me out where I am deficient. It’s not a perfect solution at all, especially since people can judge wrong—I bet some “omg so fake” threads were actually real, and some astroturf-type things written to influence others without real experience behind it got through as real.


You are right about the thespian thing, but when you watch TV/film/theatre everyone is in on the “joke” and we all know they’re not really falling in love, getting murdered, or whatever dramatic happening. I’m not sure if OOP is just trying to entertain and expects everyone to realize they’re joking, which would stick them on the thespian side, or if they have other motives. But hey, interesting point to bring up!


deleted by creator


Thanks!
I really wish people did not do this. This isn’t something I was ever taught to look for, and I like to think I got a good education. I was taught to make sure my source is credible, to consider biases and spin and what things are facts and what is just opinion, but I wasn’t taught to look for a lot of deception people call out online. But I guess I have to live with this and gain the skill to look for deception. Genuinely, thanks for helping me, since I don’t think I ever would have figured out what raises “fake” flags in most peoples’ heads on my own.


Thanks!


I’m entirely too trusting and would like to know what about the phrasing tips you off that it’s fictional. Back on Reddit I remember so many claims about posts being fake and I was never able to tease out what distinguished the “omg fake! r/thathappened” posts from the ones that weren’t accused of that, and I feel this is a skill I should be able to have on some level. Although taking an amusing post that wasn’t real as real doesn’t always have bad consequences.
But I mostly asked because I’m curious about the weird extra width on letters.


Is that what the weird extra width on some letters is, artifacts from some AI generating the post?


I could swear there was such an add-on that was this but non-NSFW, but maybe I’m misremembering.


Okay, everyone knows guns are literal weapons. Not everyone has the time to look into things and develop an anticorporate opinion to the point simply using a service is a loaded weapon and simply using it is cause enough for “no sympathy, sucks to be you!” when they have trouble with it. Maybe this might make them change their minds eventually, but even if it doesn’t… this seems a bit more blaming the victim. Get angry at the corporation, not the person who wasn’t born believing corporations bad. If I fail to lock my door, that is probably unwise of me, but everyone should be more mad at the thief for stealing from me in the first place.


deleted by creator
Ooh, a PeerTube embed… nice to see Fediverse services getting used
I find it funny that the pufferfish blows up at its own gunshot


Also asexual.
Just consider most people really like sex, and some experience it as a very intense physical want to the point it makes sense that a bad version of it is better than none at all. Sort of similar to food. Better to have bad-tasting food and at least sate your hunger than to have nothing and starve.
Although, of course, it breaks down. The comments talk about actively harmful sex people wouldn’t want as well as harmful documentation; bad sex and documentation is not actually always better than no sex or no documentation. In the analogy, this would be sex that gives you an STD, or documentation that sends you running in circles and misleads you.
I’ve found a lot of understanding sex comes with just understanding a lot of people really really want it and experience it as a nigh-on need. Maybe liken it to some intense desires you have, things you need to be happy that you nonetheless don’t need to survive. (Of course, this is a generalization, I understand not all people with sexual desires have them this intensely. Some don’t need it to be happy but would sure like it a lot. And some might even get it more mildly. But for the purpose of understanding more mainstream jokes, analogies, etc. about sex…)


deleted by creator


I was a happy MuseScore user before and after the UI changes. So this post brings to mind questions that usually float in my mind:
I do not have enough UX knowledge to criticize or make objective evaluations here. I only have how easy it is for me to navigate applications. Though I would like to work on gaining it someday, especially so I can help out FOSS targets of “bad UX” complaints.


Some people actively desire this kind of algorithm because they find it easier to find content they like this way. I’m not sure if they are immune to doomscrolling and actually have gotten it to work in a way that serves them and doesn’t involve doomscrolling, or if they are doomscrolling and okay with it. But for me, I really wish I could go back to the chronological feed era.
Feels weird reading this as the only single woman programmer in my friend group who likes men