As well as that I think people (nowadays? online? maybe it’s just a general thing though) are just bad at accepting nuance or really imagining the positions of people which differ from their own.

I like your profile picture

Not until people with ADHD are the majority - maybe with a bit more social media we can make that happen!

There are two immediate plausible reasons for a statement like that. First, because statements are preliminary, so while it might be obvious to you, someone into tech, that the robot is remote controlled, and also obvious to anyone who’s done ten seconds of googling, the statement is probably written by someone who isn’t into tech and hasn’t done ten seconds of googling yet! That would, in fact, be investigation.

But secondly because there’s a big legal difference between “he deliberately made the robot grab my arse” and “I just walked the robot around and it malfunctioned and touched her arse.” Even if the robot is generally being directly controlled and that’s what the police understand, can they charge the person controlling it with assault, or is there a high likelihood it went wrong?

When the police just decide things without investigating you get American police outcomes.

Removing words from descriptions

hut puss

pspsps come out yer hut

But he didn’t “welcome LLM code with open hands” really - he took a relatively neutral stance and said it needed to pass the same standards that human code does.

But he isn’t saying “damn people using AI”, is he?

If you purposefully remove all nuance from what people say, you attribute to them a ridiculous position, but that’s your problem not theirs.

🤦

Nor are children’s, that’s their point.

I did not realise lemmy.ml Scunthorped itself

Anecdotally you should understand what sample noise and confirmation bias are.

The bots that went silent were search indexers

Dog breeds have different behaviours.

The real pet racism is saying orange cats behave differently…

N-no, it’s his son, that’s the point of the title?

I’ve already explained I think there’s a big difference between a chance of being searched at an airport and a chance of being observed at any moment while imprisoned and I’m not sure what else might be unclear.

The definition of a panopticon is not “a small chance of being searched”, just to be clear. It’s a specific thing and you’re saying it’s similar while I’m saying it’s different enough.

But it does take effort to put ourselves in your mind where you think “girl boring, guy quirky” applies to this comic. This is what I’m still trying to understand. I’ve set out in some detail why I don’t think it applies which you’ve not engaged with at all (other than to re-assert that yours is a “perfectly valid and obvious reading” which, just to be clear, doesn’t explain why) so bye.

I click on news articles to read them, not to watch tiktoks

I can only think that you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said, so I’m going to try and explain it again. Afterwards, I’ll explain why I think you must have misunderstood and offer a final reflection.

The meme format, at least in the form criticised by your initial response, works by presenting one boring and one funny situation. It presents them with pairs of archetypical, gendered characters, rather than individual (though still gendered) ones.

This lays the meme format open to the criticism that it is stereotyping woman as boring. But it doesn’t work against the comic for two reasons:

1. the woman in the comic is not presented as boring. She imagines that the dream is about sex, but that’s not boring. Maybe if there were a negative stereotype that women are horny all the time and that’s a bad thing, this would be concerning, but that’s not the case. If you disagree on this, it would be worth saying what you think the comic is saying about women, and why. You said that it’s “only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is” without justification.
2. the two perspectives in the comic are not presented as typical. With just one woman and one man, it doesn’t present a false unity among multiple men and multiple women, with the perspectives contrasted by gender. Instead the contrast is between two individuals. And the characters aren’t the stock representations of gender that the “trad girl”, “doomer girl” and “chad” figures are. If you disagree on this, it would be worth saying why you think the comic is saying something about women rather than about the specific female character.

Those differences, hopefully, also explain why I don’t agree that it’s the “same joke” in the comic as in the meme format: the joke in the criticised meme is, “lol, woman are boring aren’t they? not like men who are interesting.” The joke in the comic is, “lol, this person wanted the dream to be about sex (hehe), but really it was complete nonsense (hehe) and now she’s got mental whiplash from the unexpected turn”.

And I think you must have misunderstood, because none of this can reasonably be called “reading things into the comic.” I’m explaining the joke in the comic for you, because you haven’t understood it correctly. You said “No mention of the dream being funny is made at all” which sounds to me like you think something in my explanation of the joke required that the joke was explicitly mentioned. That’s a very peculiar interpretation of how jokes work, but you’re not really explaining your thought process at all so I have no way of knowing whether I’ve misunderstood you. Presumably I must have, because your assertion that her dream is “only there to highlight how wacky the man’s dream is” is not referred to in the comic either.

Finally - and it probably is final, because my experience with this kind of conversation is that you are probably not really invested in it to the point where you’re willing to read a reply of this length, so there’s little point continuing - your first reply was a single image, with no comment from you. People reading had to infer that you were criticising the comic from OP. I asked you about it, and you replied with a scant 6 words. From there, you only made one, brief attempt to explain yourself and refused to elaborate further.

People come at discussions from different places. You offered a criticism but were never on the same page as me, and never put the effort in to get us on the same page, even though I tried, and you instead resorted quickly to unpleasant accusations. Let’s try and be better than that.

Du hast etwas falsch verstanden.