Most people I know start at 2010.

My Shakespeare teacher in college called it a concordance when we studied Macbeth. There was a full concordance and then concordances for each speaking part. Pretty fascinating stuff.

I’ve seen a sudden upsurge of promoted videos in the last week or two championing trickle-down economics in my youtube suggested video feed. I thought it was odd. They don’t use the term trickle-down economics, but they promote the rich as job creators and use all the Reagan talking points. Based on the comments, lots of people are eating it up as amazing insight.

Watch Alita Battle Angel or Elysium.

Wait till the meth wears off before you get on Lemmy.

all this, four naught

Whole Carolina Reaper peppers.

I don’t think there’s a better response than this.

Consider Bruce Lee. Dedicated his time to mastering multiple martial arts. Died of edema at 32 years old. No opponents. It’s possible he drank too much water.

Kevin.

I tend to hyperfocus on things I can control and/or try to learn a new skill. Both are distractions, but you can’t control what you can’t control. Obsessing over those things leads to dark places. Sometimes, mental judo helps. You can reframe a situation that seems terrible by looking at it from another context. Unfortunately, it’s hard to give examples for this.

I have typo’d hotfix as both hotdix and hotfux. One letter can change everything.

Here’s what ChatGPT 3.5 says:

The Rosetta Stone played a crucial role in deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphics because it provided a key to understanding the script by presenting the same text in three different scripts: Ancient Greek, Egyptian hieroglyphics, and demotic (a simplified script used for everyday purposes). This allowed scholars to correlate the known Greek text with the Egyptian texts and begin to decipher the hieroglyphics.

A GPT-based AI, while powerful in many ways, would likely face significant challenges in deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphics without access to something akin to the Rosetta Stone. Here’s why:

1. Lack of Direct Contextual Data: GPT models learn from a vast amount of text data, but the historical and contextual gap between modern languages and ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics is enormous. GPT models might not have enough direct or relevant data to bridge this gap.

2. Limited Multilingualism: GPT models, including their previous versions like GPT-3.5, do not inherently “know” multiple languages the way humans do. They have learned statistical patterns in text, which enables them to generate text in multiple languages but doesn’t guarantee deep understanding or translation of highly specialized languages like hieroglyphics.

3. Lack of Connection to the Rosetta Stone Context: GPT models lack the ability to access external sources or historical events, which is what made the Rosetta Stone so invaluable in deciphering hieroglyphics. Without access to that kind of contextual information, it would be difficult for the model to make the necessary connections.

4. Complex Symbolic Nature: Egyptian hieroglyphics are not a straightforward language like those GPT models are trained on. Hieroglyphics use a combination of ideograms, phonograms, and determinatives to convey meaning. The complexity of hieroglyphics goes beyond the syntax and structure of modern languages, making it a unique challenge.

In summary, while a GPT-based AI could perform some basic statistical analyses on hieroglyphics to identify patterns, it’s unlikely to decipher the script in a comprehensive and accurate way without a Rosetta Stone-like source that provides a bridge between the ancient script and a known language. Hieroglyphics represent a highly specialized domain that would require deep contextual understanding, which GPT models might struggle to achieve given their current capabilities.

You wound me. I’ve been wounded.

Not really. I have unavoidable financial obligations coming soon that I will need this payrate for. I actually love the work I do, too, but I have a distaste for the employer, so it’s a weird feeling. I get to play with Linux and containerization and Python, which I love, and I’m generally self-managed, so the only thing wrong with the job is that, at the end of the day, my work feels wasted where I’m doing it. On the other hand, I use the skills I gain at work outside of work on OSS stuff, so it’s an OK tradeoff.

I do. I’m riding out the clock. I’ve already put the time in and am grandfathered into better retirement/severance benefits than I could get anywhere else. I hate it, but I have a family to feed.

lovely jubbly

No. I usually have to wrap mine around my forearm a dozen or so times to keep it out of the water.