Bodell

Yes the problem is that I just don’t understand a how to use this fresh new innovative product that will sweep the world by storm with its ability to take the burden and hard work out of the whole writing process. If only I see the light through these amazing stupefying mind-befuddling product demos…

And no I do not write ad content for the web nor will I ever get a computer to write my feelings for me. Not in 5 years, not in 10 years, not whatever you tell your up-incoming investors. The fact that writing about personal grief and marketmuse are being equated as like things is rather disturbing, in a sociopathic/psychopathic sort of way.

Judging by all of these comments I believe I may just be in the wrong place and that hacker-news is no longer for people like myself.

This is a level of mental problems is beyond my ability to comment.

However I will say that my comments have far more to do with tact than taste.

And yes poor sweet grieving robot. To bad her sister GPT-2 died when she was much younger.

It was not said carelessly. I care a lot actually. And I don’t feel good about any of this it’s deeply depressing.

Apparently not being able to recognize ads is a popular trend. I believe South Park dedicated a whole season to this phenomenon. “Is it news? Or an ad?”

1. You nailed it no one cares about the dead sister… not even the author of this piece.

2. No it’s not a real affair because you can’t have an affair with inanimate objects.

3. I am a writer (so your No True Scotsman implication doesn’t work here) and it’s neither fascinating nor terrifying. The only people who feel threatened by it are bullshit artists worried they will get out bullshited.

Since I’m not the one who used my sisters death to sell a product - and I mean really read what she wrote, she is purposely insinuating that she is having a love affair with the product. “I’ve never read such an accurate Modern Love in my life”, “I felt acutely that there was something illicit about what I was doing” , “One night, when my husband was asleep” - I think I’m being quite nice about it. If I knew this person in real life I don’t believe I would be as nice.

Well I’m not speaking for everyone, but since I think I’m the only one who used the word “phony” here, I’ll speak for myself. I used that word not to disparage the tech (the tech I simply called worthless, as it’s not worth even discussing) but the person writing the article. If I were her family I do not believe I would ever speak to her agin until she retracted her product advertising in which she shamelessly used her sisters death to help sell. Her words are what I found disgusting.

I’m also 31 and obviously into tech to be here, so not an old man waving sticks at trains. What bizarre assumptions you have.

I’m not sure I know how to write about how sad and awful I find this article to be. I also can’t think of a worse way for someone to use my death than to write a tech review for a product, much less this completely worthless product. This whole thing reeks of phony.

In regards to your second link, I found this quote coming to mind while reading about your linkages to chromaticity: “Ineluctable modality of the visible: at least that if no more, thought through my eyes. Signatures of all things I am here to read, seaspawn and seawrack, the nearing tide, that rusty boot. Snotgreen, bluesilver, rust: coloured signs. Limits of the diaphane. But he adds: in bodies. Then he was aware of them bodies before of them coloured. How? By knocking his sconce against them, sure. Go easy. Bald he was and a millionaire, maestro di color che sanno. Limit of the diaphane in. Why in? Diaphane, adiaphane. If you can put your five fingers through it it is a gate, if not a door. Shut your eyes and see.” - Ulysses This too if you dig a little deeper is an allusion to Aristotle’s work. So I would say that many others have also found abstract analogous meaning in the way in which we decipher color and the way in which we decipher the world.

I just want to add to your number 1.

Not only would this be marginal it also wouldn’t necessarily be catching the real “monsters”. I don’t think if you find someone with old already known about images that it would necessarily equate to someone that actually abuses children. I think about this in a similar way (not exactly) as I do with drugs, just because a person gets busted with drugs doesn’t mean they are a drug dealer or a maker of drugs.

This is not to say that perhaps there are some more active real-time stuff in these databases that maybe with enough searching could make its way back to the perpetrator and indeed maybe even find a victim. It’s just seems that that would be far more marginal and is generally what I’m concerned about when it comes to these issues. For me it’s more important to protect children than it is to bust some weirdos for looking at the wrong porn (these can both be related as well and I do understand that I just think it’s not as cut and dry as we believe it is), further if it keeps said weirdo from actually harming a child then let them have it. We allow these databases to exist for, presumably, the same reason, with the idea that we can stop future victims from happening.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that I do not think with disagree very much on this topic, other than our subjective impressions of the game - liking and/or disliking. I do think that we may be talking on slightly different levels of abstraction. Which is tough for me to get right with short online comments. Thanks for engaging on this, though. I enjoyed reading your thoughts very much.

My play through definitely implied that social media was good and that not using it was bad. Seems to me that anyone could play this and decide their own interpretation of "anxious wolf" which is exactly my criticism of it. Things that contain more depth are less subjective in their interpretations. I would even take aim at the idea that "fear of being a bad person" is something we over-estimate, I often wish more people had this fear (like vaccines because it's good).

It reminds me of the whole Colbert paradox, where he polls equally well with all sides of the political spectrum despite engaging with politics daily. No matter what you believed you felt he believed the same things as you.

This is not that I disagree with your overall view here - I don't, people should absolutely apply logic in reasoning to their rick/reward calculations rather then going on pure gut feeling - however I just do not believe this game really goes into any of this in a manner fitting to the complexity of the subject. But really, how could 6 min flash game do that?

I was not expressing a critical view of news media simply because it is not contextual in this situation. The “game” is actually very non-specific as to what the “news” is - or anything else for that matter. So, I was simply applying something like covid or global warming to it in order to show that the generalized premise of the game does not hold as a very insightful view of human being’s relationships with their anxiety.

I just finished playing this and I wasn’t particularly impressed. It seemed to be saying that your anxiety is controlling you when you choose not to use, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Tinder. I don’t believe that using social media apps is a necessary or meaningful thing to do with your life. Nor do I think it’s fair to imply that people who choose not to engage on those platforms are suffering from anxiety disorders. In fact it often seems more the opposite way around.

However, I’m not entirely sure that this was the intended insinuation. Yet it’s hard to read anything else into it since its about a girl trying to engage with her friends on her phone across these various platforms and being stopped by the ‘anxiety wolf’. She even gets her health dinged for sharing a news story, which to some extent could be viewed as engaging with reality.

Engaging with reality can most assuredly cause anxiety, however I don’t really view this as improper. I don’t believe that mental health should be thought of as a framing or mindset one has to the extent that it frames reality away. I.E. I may feel better if I pretend covid is not real though I am not making a healthy choice if I do.