• 6 Posts
  • 70 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2025

help-circle


  • s@piefed.worldOPtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldMandatory self-reflection hours
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I apologize for my error! I will avoid using em-dashes in the future. Would you like to delve deeper into other tropes of AI writing? As of my most recent update, other tropes of AI writing include the following:

    1. Lists
    2. Surface level falsities
    3. Use of em-dashes
    4. Inability to find sources for information
    5. Repetition
    6. Using em-dashes
    7. Internal contradictions
    8. Uncanny positivity and encouragement

    Any of these would be a great trope of A.I. writing — Would you like to discuss any of the listed items?












  • s@piefed.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzi 💚 animals.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I see no text on the page you linked that references any connotation of superiority or purity. The first usage of the meme does not suggest either a superiority or a purity, as you claim; however, an audience might project their preferences and gatekeeping onto that which is without bias. In the vast majority of the examples in the link, there is simply a contextual miscommunication between two valid interpretations of a term; only a few examples do suggest superiority or purity. Deferring to imgflip, many of the user-made memes do not have that connotation, while some do. Based on these data, I do not see a subtext of connotation or purity to be necessarily implied in use of that template. The comedy can be derived from something as simple as a word having two meanings.

    Once again, you have also claimed that I said something which I had not (prior to this comment).

    Edit: adding this image



  • s@piefed.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzi 💚 animals.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    If somebody’s just following dogma and thinking within a box, they’re not doing science.

    I didn’t even interpret the meme as suggesting that one group of subjects is better than another, and I was disappointed to see so many commenters here thinking that their narrow or broad branch of study is better or more of a true science than other valid fields.




  • s@piefed.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzSay hello to Bary
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    It seems to fundamentally change what it means “to orbit” something.

    As I understood the term, orbiting would be used correctly in these cases:

    • A lighter object orbits a heavier object, and both of their paths of motion are elliptical about their barycenter

    • Two objects of identical mass orbit each other, and their paths of motion are circular about their barycenter

    In contrast, the image above implies the following:

    • A lighter object does not orbit a heavier object; they both orbit their barycenter with an elliptical path of motion

    • Two objects of identical mass do not orbit each other; they both orbit their barycenter with a circular path of motion

    Even the Wikipedia page for barycenter, which OP linked to, opens with the following:

    “the barycenter… is the center of mass of two or more bodies that orbit one another and is the point about which the bodies orbit.”

    Perhaps “orbit” as a verb has two meanings, depending on the specificity of the context.