Thanks for sharing!

As far as I know, there is no such list (yet).

What should be done:
Escalate it to the people responsible for IT administration & security in your company or institution. They’ll deal with it.

But the default step if you suspect of being infected is not to use the device at all until you got a green light for it from the security/admin folks. Power down, disconnect from any networks, either via physical cables or wireless, unplug external storage devices and wait for further info.

ChatGPT is, in it’s core, a sequence predictor/generator. Give it some context and it will produce most probable results.

Having the context of man, boat and river is very likely to match this “how does the man get the goat on the other side of the river” riddle, which is probably very predominantly present in the data set ChatGPT was trained on.

That’s why ChatGPT can be helpful for lots of different purposes, but shouldn’t be taken literally. Errors are very likely to happen. It can give important hints, but always check the results thouroughly.

has been

Enough said I guess.

How many non-muslimic women wear hijabs because they like to?

How would one even get the idea to wear a hijab at all if it weren’t for religion?

You do you. :)

As far as I know, I am neurotypical, so mind that when reading my comment.

Regarding the title of your question:
Because neurotypicals are the majority of people. As usual, majorities set norms and actively or passively decide upon common concepts like ethical or societal rules.

Regarding the issue you described:
Even though it might seem exhausting, I think it’s important to see people – regardless whether neurotypical or not – not as a homogeneous mass but as a highly variable mixture.

Sure, even then there are common rules like don’t punch people. But those are the broad and general ground rules.

Then, there are the nuances, which can be highly individual.

In your example, regarding the punctuation, use of grammar as well as verbosity of replies, I would react completely different than your friend. I wouldn’t mind any of those things, which seemed rude to her. Okay, maybe I would feel like I weren’t given the attention I hoped for if, after pouring my heart out, I just get a simple “K.” as response. That would make me sad, because I was hoping for compassion and a dialouge dealing with the issue.
But apart from such things, that would probably be totally fine for me.

One behaviour and two very different reactions due to two different people.
As such nuances are often individual, it’s probably best to explore what kind of behaviour the other person would feel comfortable with and with which behaviour they don’t. Repeat that process with everyone in your life, who you would also like to keep relations to.

That’s also related to a thing known as role-behaviour in psychology, which also applies to neurotypicals. When I talk to my superior at work, I behave differently than when I am at home with my wife. Then, I also behave differently with my friends. And among the friends, I learned enough about some, to know what and how I can say something to them and from which topics or phrasings it’s probably best to steer away.

I don’t think that this makes it wrong. As I see it, the meaning of your advice is to prioritize self-care over work. It surely helps with mental and physical health. And I think this also applies to people saving lifes of others like medical doctors. They are also still people, they can also suffer from that kind of work. And I always prefer a doctor who thinks about getting enough sleep and quality time in life over someone who drives themselves mad and makes themselves sick by burdening the whole world on their shoulders.

If they can’t help themselves, how can they help me?
Or, 101 of car crashes, first save yourself before you attempt to save others.

There are also others who help. It’s not one single person’s job to save everyone.

If someone says X, but does Y, this doesn’t mean they are not right about X.

Other example, if someone is raising public awareness about littering in nature and is then caught throwing a plastic bottle into a forest, does that mean they are wrong?

Sure, it’s shitty, but that doesn’t make them wrong in saying that people shouldn’t do it, even if they are not living up to their own words.

It’s the basic driver of all somewhat intelligent life on earth.

Do something - fail - explore alternatives - do it again - success? Keep it. Fail? Back to exploring and retrying.

Whether it’s babies learning to walk or you overcoming difficult situations in life. We should embrace errors and failures of others, as it’s an opportunity for them and us to learn and prevent similar mistakes in the future.

*Except if you want to do good science. Good scientists will identify false confidence and will aim to steer well clear of it

If someone isn’t already doing that, they’re not scientists.

Fake it until you make it?

When dealing with a busy person in a professional context;

• Emails should be as short as possible while still conveying the needed information, don’t make a busy person excavate the relevant info from somewhere near the middle of the fifth paragraph.
• Whenever possible phrase a question in a way that can be answered in one word.

Not a fan of this. Feels like a result of over-optimization in a capitalistic, profti-driven society.

We are humans. Not machines. So treat each other like that. If you like to write a couple of more words to express yourself or some issue in a way that feels representing, go for it. Doesn’t mean to escalate this into a novel, but it’s fine to take a pause and talk more.

Hell, it even goes for people. Leave them a little happier, a little wiser, a little more prosperous than before.

I like that. Thank you. I’ll try.

What if you can’t find the true problem?

Much better version.

Still looking for it.

Form your opinions critically, don’t easily judge.

It is necessary to employ a method which enables the training procedure to distinguish copyrighted material. In the “dumbest” case, some humans will have to label it.

Just because you’ve edited a comment, doesn’t mean that this can be seen as “oh, this is under copyright now”.

I don’t say it’s technical impossible. To the contrary, it very much is possible. It’s just more work. This drives the development costs up and can give some form of satisfaction to angered ex-reddit users like me. However, those costs will be peanuts for giants like Google / Alphabet.

NYT is currently suing because of copyright infringiments.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/business/media/new-york-times-open-ai-microsoft-lawsuit.html

it’s unclear that copyright has anything to say about AI training anyway

Although lawmakers worldwide have slept while AI advanced and therefore missed to make some important laws, they are catching up. Europe recently passed its first AI act. As far as I’ve seen it also states that companies must disclose a detailed summary of their training data.

https://www.ml6.eu/blogpost/ai-models-compliance-eu-ai-act