I have no idea what you’re even talking about. Neither of these people is an AI researcher and neither is making the claims you’re here arguing against.

Anthropomorphizing them isn’t going to suddenly change reality…

No more than thought terminating clishes do.

Consciousness gets mentioned the first time at 1 hour and 26 minutes into the episode. The discussion is about cognition - they’re not the same thing and nobody is claiming that they are.

You can always ask but you can’t demand it. Taking photos of even a single individual without their consent in a public place is perfectly legal in most of Europe. What is not okay is publishing that image though even that isn’t automatically illegal. If you’re not the focus of the shot but you appear in the background in the crowd then that is okay to publish even if you say no.

Agreed. That’s why I keep referencing the toupee fallacy: it’s easy to detect AI slop because it’s slop but anything well-made flies under the radar. This leads many people to assume that everything made using AI is by default not good and conversely when something is good they falsely assume a human made it. I’d argue that virtually every devout AI hater has at some point enjoyed AI content because they failed to detect it as such.

So no, not all toupees look bad - you only notice the bad ones.

A looter - finally!

• That local prepper, probably

It has always been a broad term. It simply refers to any system designed to perform a cognitive task that would normally require a human. It’s not synonymous with the term software.

Oh - you’re right. I don’t know why I thought that this was about trying to record their dreams. Yeah, scratch that.

I’m not even going to pretend I have the expertise to comment on this, but I’ll comment anyway.

This method seems really fishy to me. After reading this, I’m left with the impression that if you massage the data enough, you’ll find what you want to find. Having mice “watch movies” and then conveniently have those movies replayed in their dreams doesn’t seem like how neither dreams nor mice work. Would the findings be the same if the researchers didn’t know what movies were shown to the mice? I’m doubtful.

Been enough for me.

Reading through this thread has been a bizarre experience - I genuinely couldn’t have imagined the amount of pushback you get here just for speaking up for people struggling with this. It seems exactly the kind of thing I’d have expected deep compassion for, given the userbase here.

Still, my conclusion is that much of it boils down to the term “addiction” - since it’s a medical term, people seem to think that once you medicalize it, you’re paving the way to ban it.

Personally I don’t care what term we use. If people prefer “compulsive porn use,” then fine. For me the point has always been the lived experience of what people mean when they talk about living with a porn addiction - even if it officially doesn’t count as one. In my opinion it does, because it checks virtually all the boxes of the standard definition: you need more of it, you seek out more extreme stuff, you get cravings when you stop, and you keep going long after the negatives have started to outweigh the positives. If that’s not addiction, then I don’t know what is.

and the mods have promoted right wing candidates.

What does that have to do with anything?

It’s a pleasure to meet you! The only thing exceeding my level of wisdom is my modesty.

Are you seriously not able to acknowledge that some people simply want to fix their own lives and don’t care what others do with theirs? Does everyone talking about their porn addiction have a secret agenda? Is that really what you think?

Nobody here is advocating for banning porn or even restricting anyone’s access to it. I’ve never met a single person struggling with what I call porn addiction - whether it clinically qualifies as addiction or not - who wants to restrict other people’s access to it.

There doesn’t need to be any ideology attached to one’s personal desire to quit or cut back on their porn consumption.

It’s exceedingly rare for anyone to acknowledge their error online these days - and for that you have my respect.

Your justifications for these views fall quite deep into the conspiracy land.

Wanting to quit / cut back on porn is not synonymous with being anti-porn and “hypersexuality” is not an official medical diagnosis neither.

What would you like it to be called then when someone spends 4+ hours a day, 5+ days a week masturbating to porn, feels terrible about it, tries to quit, and then immediately caves and falls right back into the same cycle?

How do you think a person like that feels when they’re hit with all these accusations the second they open up about wanting their normal life back? Reading these comments honestly makes me sick. Just fucking imagine the backlash if almost any other mental-health issue affecting tens of millions of people got ridiculed here the way porn addiction does.

I’m sure you can find recovering alcoholics who equally advocate for alcohol prohibition, but you’d have to be out of your damn mind to jump on someone the moment they mention cutting back on drinking and start accusing them of being a puritan or whatever. Yet somehow that passes for sound logic when it’s about someone trying to quit porn.

Yeah, totally my bad that you’re being a mean jerk.

I was being facetious and taking your side - thanks for insulting me for it.