So you don't think it looks desparate, but you assume it looks desparate to other people?
Indeed, that's not elitism. Maybe just a projection of what you fear people would think about you if you posted it? By the same logic, does someone opening a Tinder account look desparate to potential partners?
The most obvious benefit seems to be that it allows you to look down on people who don't know it. Make sure to mask this with a lot of talk about how it allows you to think differently and by dropping big words such as homoiconicity - that way some people will mistake your arrogance and pretentiousness for genuine superiority.
If you want to build an online following based on this, I warn you that the market has already been cornered.
It pains me to say it, but I really think it pays dividends to consider the very obvious possibility that the people who are doing this are in general just not socially well-adjusted.
Everything about OpenAI speaks of people who do not put great value on shared human connections, no?
Hey, I like that artist. I am going to train a computer to produce nearly identical work as if by them so I can have as many as I like, to meet my own wishes.
Why is it surprising that it didn't really cross their mind that a virtual girlfriend is not a good look?
This is not an organisation that has the feelings of people central to its mission. It's almost definitionally the opposite.
I think you're being unfairly downvoted, mostly because I don't think childish quite conveys the thought. There does seem to be some personality type that likes a lot of flair in their life -- jewelry, stickers, tattoos, busy t-shirts -- and it's always felt a little odd to me, too.
At risk of being reductionist, it is kind of hard to understand why anyone would feel compelled to signal their likes and group-identities to strangers in such an overt way. But I'm probably revealing more about my own personality by saying that than I am theirs.
Hear hear. But you're not doing it properly. Please be consistent.
"what about being human when it matters most? In person" - doesn't this exclude people with social anxiety disorders?
"mix of knock-off stilettos" - doesn't this exclude people who wear flats?
"people bumbling about who looks a hair too much like Dwight Schrute" - doesn't this exclude people who do look like him and may have body image issues?
"You have just entered the land of networking hell" - this imagery is deeply offensive to some religions
"Screw the schmoozing" - using sexual imagery? No thanks.
"The people who hand out business cards like they are condoms in a high school sex ed. class" - alienates those with a conservative upbringing
"Disclaimer – keep those condoms, kids" - again, pretty offensive to Catholics
"They want meaningful relationships" - again social anxiety
"And people respond to kindness." - not everyone. Exclusionary to those on certain parts of the autistic spectrum.
"The same philosophy goes for networking" - I can imagine quite a few real philosophers getting offended about the belittling of their profession
"One good conversation is better than five quick ones every day of the week" - not the Shabbat!
"It’s for people who will never be more than middlemen" - think of all the middlemen out there, feeling excluded at this hate speech and switching off
"when you remember to be human" - deeply insulting to robots
Number one: you're using an overloaded term, but I suppose that your specific social conditioning has given you a specific concept of the definition of normal self expression that this clearly falls out of those boundaries.
Number two: this person's goal CLEARLY isn't to fool anyone, it's not a deep fake video, and it's frankly none of your business or concern that they enjoy using an animated avatar.
Also I feel like SO discourages any kind of personality showing, which in turn makes the place feel like it is occupied by a legion of "Zuckerbots". Not exactly an inclusive place for people who are proud of their identity and that identity strongly differs from "young cis hetero white male".
There is a style of hedonistic lifestyle/culture that usually comes with an anime profile picture and pronouns in the twitter bio. If that is someone's true "form" then go for it, but when its fake yuck.
I've been running a Mastodon instance for a while and it's largely full of furries, and largely connected to other furry instances; when someone using a photo of their face as an icon replies to me, it always feels like An Outsider barging in.
"because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere"
Do you want to fit somewhere but haven't yet found a place to fit, or do you not care about fitting anywhere? If it's the latter you may have a social-variant blindspot (halfway down this reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Enneagram/comments/kx0wfa/russ_huds... ). If it's the former you're probably just looking in the wrong places, or aren't engaging enough with the right people to find their similarities to you (or find out if they know of someone else similar to you).
"where I send an email in corporate settings with various tags to allow other people to ignore it in time and corporate code of conduct"
My employer uses a system called "Bucketlist" for kudos or something of the sort. I don't really know because the moment I saw it I created a filter that autodeletes every single email with that word in it. I can handle being reminded of death, but I don't want it popping into my work inbox.
"Please correct if I am wrong ( I have done my best to limit my news intake lately ), but conservatives being angry over gays does not ring true to my ears."
But, as you indicate, conflation of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, transsexual, and a variety of other groups make it difficult at times to figure out what people are actually in favor of or opposed to.
"Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization. It is actually their opponents, which, in itself, is already interesting."
It's all sides. If you're noticing one side and not the other it's because of the bias of the media you're consuming. Examples:
I don't really buy it, based on my personal experiences, which play out exactly opposite of what you're saying here. I think you're wrong. It's been very strange watching your evolution as an online persona.
You're acting like the opinions on these forums are strongly held and like there aren't a significant minority of people 'trying on' personas or personality traits in order to see how others respond to them. I don't see how that's a meaningful distinction from people who have made the color beige their sole personality trait and strongly believe in manufacturing consent at the cost of all other goals.
I'd have thought if anything, we'd be more trusting and supportive of the person disclosing a picture, name, etc. (the criteria used for gender identification).
Why though? My experience is that aside from everyone's monkeysphere, people generally tend to hate other people.
Social media where you interact with a higher than Dunbar number of people (ie Not Facebook) is often just a nasty status game.
Humanizing a pull request can bring all sorts of baggage from that into the evaluation of a contained block of ideas.
Indeed, that's not elitism. Maybe just a projection of what you fear people would think about you if you posted it? By the same logic, does someone opening a Tinder account look desparate to potential partners?
reply