fredo's recent activity
-
Comment on I always knew I was different. I just didn’t know I was a sociopath. in ~health.mental
-
Comment on I always knew I was different. I just didn’t know I was a sociopath. in ~health.mental
fredo (edited )Link ParentNot who you asked, but I don't believe we do. Non-sociopaths are perfectly capable of making tough decisions and calculating the impact of their actions. The things we do need sociopaths for are...Not who you asked, but I don't believe we do. Non-sociopaths are perfectly capable of making tough decisions and calculating the impact of their actions. The things we do need sociopaths for are things of dubious utility that we probably shouldn't be doing, such as torture, execution, war, etc.
A sociopath will default to whatever benefit them to the detriment of the collective.
-
Comment on Single dose of clinical-grade LSD provides immediate and lasting relief from anxiety, wins approval for phase III trials in ~health.mental
fredo LinkI don't wanna rain on anyone's parade, but I would like to say that, as is the case with any substance, contraindications to psychedelics do exist. Talk to your doctor.I don't wanna rain on anyone's parade, but I would like to say that, as is the case with any substance, contraindications to psychedelics do exist. Talk to your doctor.
-
Comment on Research paper compares LLM responses based on politeness of requests and finds quality difference in ~tech
fredo (edited )Link ParentI would argue that the same guidelines we use to presume that living beings are capable of emotion will, at some point, attribute emotion to an AI. In my opinion, whatever leads us to believe that...I would argue that the same guidelines we use to presume that living beings are capable of emotion will, at some point, attribute emotion to an AI. In my opinion, whatever leads us to believe that others are capable of emotion will have to be applied to non-biological entities.
Our understanding of human consciousness is primitive. We assume others have inner lives because their behavior and presentation are similar to ours. Mental shortcuts such as "he cries, therefore he suffers" allow us to ascribe personhood to others. The same shortcuts will inevitably be applied to AI. Especially when it provides responses that appeal to us like real people do. We won't ascribe personhood to AI out of our deep understanding of consciousness, but rather because we know so little about ourselves.
-
Comment on Who are the pop stars, from any era, who have extraordinary skills? in ~music
fredo Link ParentI'm not talking about quality, I'm way more of a Beatles fan myself. I just think MJ is more universal across ages, cultures, etc.I'm not talking about quality, I'm way more of a Beatles fan myself. I just think MJ is more universal across ages, cultures, etc.
-
Comment on Research paper compares LLM responses based on politeness of requests and finds quality difference in ~tech
fredo LinkI'm always polite with GPT. I'm aware that CS people have academic reasons to tell everyone GPT is just a machine which merely simulates the appearance of intelligence. However, as far as I know,...I'm always polite with GPT. I'm aware that CS people have academic reasons to tell everyone GPT is just a machine which merely simulates the appearance of intelligence. However, as far as I know, that is what I am as well.
-
Comment on Who are the pop stars, from any era, who have extraordinary skills? in ~music
fredo Link ParentI would definitely say MJ is more universal than Beatles. Just my impression.I would definitely say MJ is more universal than Beatles. Just my impression.
-
Comment on Who are the pop stars, from any era, who have extraordinary skills? in ~music
fredo (edited )Link ParentIn my experience, Michael Jackson is damm near universal. Even people who don't care for pop stars, like metalheads or all kinds of snobs everywhere in the world seem to enjoy his music, probably...In my experience, Michael Jackson is damm near universal. Even people who don't care for pop stars, like metalheads or all kinds of snobs everywhere in the world seem to enjoy his music, probably since the first time they hear it. There's something very primal about his beats that I genuinely believe gets to everyone, in every culture.
-
Comment on Recommend a nonfiction book accessible to outsiders that makes your interest seem awesome in ~books
fredo (edited )Link ParentSad to hear about David Bordwell. He was quite influential. His approach to formal analysis is, in my view, useful and sane. In a time where everything is interpreted in search of hidden real...Sad to hear about David Bordwell. He was quite influential. His approach to formal analysis is, in my view, useful and sane. In a time where everything is interpreted in search of hidden real world meanings and connections, it was always reassuring to learn from him that it is okay to comprehend film through the study of its own inner workings.
-
Comment on Recommend a nonfiction book accessible to outsiders that makes your interest seem awesome in ~books
fredo (edited )LinkThe Way Hollywood Tells It, by David Bordwell, is a wonderful book on historical formal trends in American cinema. It is likely to make the reader excited about film history and analyses, as well...The Way Hollywood Tells It, by David Bordwell, is a wonderful book on historical formal trends in American cinema. It is likely to make the reader excited about film history and analyses, as well as renew their appreciation for American film.
The Philosophy of Horror, by Noël Carroll, is likely to refine the reader's appreciation for philosophy and the horror genre as a whole.
The Philosophy of Film Noir and The Philosophy of Neo-Noir, by Mark T. Conard, would have the same effect as Carroll's book, but for film noir.
Hitchcock/Truffaut is a book where two masters converse about the craft. They go through all Hitchcock's films up to that point. If that book doesn't get you excited about film, I don't know what will.
Sculpting in Time, by Andrei Tarkovsky, is a particular, otherworldly, and hauntingly beautiful autobiographical account of how film and life go hand in hand. It is hard to define this book, it is at once film theory, autobiography, poetry, and philosophy.
Directing: Film Techniques and Aesthetics, by Michael Rabiger, is a very practical book full of clearly explained terminology and techniques. I didn't read it from start to finish because I already knew a lot of it, but it is the best, most complete, and most didactic book on directing I ever encountered. This book will teach you so much, it's incredible.
I am hesitant to recommend any screenwriting manuals because there is a tendency for readers to overestimate the importance of structure to the detriment of everything else that makes a screenplay good. Act structure is often viewed as a kind of shortcut, a holy grail that will magically create an engaging story. Writing is a lot more complicated than that, and there are plenty of examples of great movies with an odd act structure, and bad ones with a "perfect" structure.
This reminds me of when people glorified Dan Harmon's structure for Rick & Morty episodes, completely ignoring that that structure would be nothing without magnific worldbuilding, cool sci-fi concepts, interesting characters, and a constant flow of knockout jokes. And the structure itself was not that innovative for anyone with previous knowledge of screenwriting manuals.
I'd recommend The Tools of Screenwriting, by David Howard and Edward Marbley, because it is a less formulaic, less self-help book presenting discussions on several topics relating to screenplays. Also, look for a good commented version of Aristotle's Poetics. Seriously. You want principles, not rules.
Other than that, David Trottier's The Screenwriter's Bible is a good summary of a lot of well-known guidelines. But please, for the love of god, don't get hung up on rules and structure. View them as helpful tools to understand stories, not as something you must follow like a gospel. And read a lot of actual scripts. Not transcripts, screenplays. The ones they use in production.
I'm pretty sure Trottier's book teaches formatting, in practice a lot of it is done by software nowadays. When in doubt, John August is a great reference.
-
Comment on Would a fairy or a walrus surprise you more if you found it on your doorstep? in ~talk
fredo (edited )Link ParentI'm trying to think of how I would actually react to that concrete situation, and which stages would my mind go through. First, and I'm thinking of a tiny flying fairy like Tinker Bell, I would...I'm trying to think of how I would actually react to that concrete situation, and which stages would my mind go through.
First, and I'm thinking of a tiny flying fairy like Tinker Bell, I would probably think I'm dealing with an insect. I would run away in a ridiculous fashion and come back to kill it after a moment. I would probably be holding my slipper, and there's a good chance I would hit it (I kill a lot of insects). I'd be horrified to learn that I just killed a tiny human with wings. That traumatic experience would change my worldview, I might never kill another insect. Maybe I'd become vegan due to a fear of unintentionally eating humanoid creatures.
If I didn't manage to kill it, and it started to talk, I would most likely question my sanity regardless of what the creature said. I would be terrified, maybe I'd look for my partner to tell me if I'm going crazy. There's a chance that I kill it either way or run away while screaming.
And how would I know it is not malicious, demonic, or manipulative?
I might call the police, a priest, or the exterminator. Or leave the house completely.
If I was a child, I might indulge in magical thinking. But I'm an adult, to me the boundaries of the possible are tangible. Reality and imagination inhabit completely distinct worlds.
This is not a movie where characters suddenly overcome their apprehensions to expediently advance the plot. In all cases, I don't believe I would have a calm and enlightening conversation with the fairy.
-
Comment on Would a fairy or a walrus surprise you more if you found it on your doorstep? in ~talk
fredo LinkA walrus is highly unlikely. A fairy is also highly unlikely. However, I have a good indication that walruses exist in this world, while fairies are likely restricted to fictional worlds. A fairy...A walrus is highly unlikely. A fairy is also highly unlikely. However, I have a good indication that walruses exist in this world, while fairies are likely restricted to fictional worlds. A fairy at my doorstep would require a mind-bending transport between actual and non-actual worlds. A 1000kg walrus could simply mean I'm on a Mr. Beast video. Both Mr. Beast and walruses exist, so I would be significantly less surprised upon seeing them.
-
Comment on What is the "bible" of your hobby or activity? in ~hobbies
fredo Link ParentI sure have. If I understand correctly you're looking both for theory and filmmaking correctly? I'll look for some references when I get home.I sure have. If I understand correctly you're looking both for theory and filmmaking correctly? I'll look for some references when I get home.
-
Comment on Police bodycam shows sheriff hunting for 'obscene' books at library in ~books
fredo Link ParentWhat does it mean for something to be "orthogonal" in that context?What does it mean for something to be "orthogonal" in that context?
-
Comment on What is the "bible" of your hobby or activity? in ~hobbies
fredo LinkMaybe Film Art: An Introduction and Narration in the Fiction Film, both by David Bordwell. They're not bibles, but rather well known references.Maybe Film Art: An Introduction and Narration in the Fiction Film, both by David Bordwell. They're not bibles, but rather well known references.
-
Comment on Denis Villeneuve hates dialogue in film in ~movies
fredo (edited )Link ParentThe notion that film should be uniquely visual was born with film itself. Early film theorists such as Sergei Eisenstein and Rudolf Arnheim believed images should take precedence over dialogue and...The notion that film should be uniquely visual was born with film itself. Early film theorists such as Sergei Eisenstein and Rudolf Arnheim believed images should take precedence over dialogue and music. They also believed that music should be a counterpoint to the visuals, to avoid being redundant. A comedy scene should have a somber soundtrack and a tragedy might be punctuated with humorous tones, essentially interdicting any sentiment other than irony. This had elitist overtones, seeking to differentiate film from the art of the common folk. Theater is cheap, words are dirty, and music is depraved. Film should be elevated, uncontaminated by vulgar emotion.
They lost. Film became the art of the masses, defined as the culmination of sight, sound, and the performing arts. Under that paradigm, Stanley Kubrick is just as cinematic as Todd Solondz, Alain Resnais, Ingmar Bergman, Sidney Lumet, and Richard Linklater. The delicate interplay between moving images, music, dialogue, and sound effects gave rise to an art form that was, at once, highly sophisticated and uniquely engaging. Nowadays, even the cheapest melodrama is orders of magnitude more complex than the contrived artificialism of "pure film".
-
Comment on Denis Villeneuve hates dialogue in film in ~movies
fredo (edited )Link ParentIt's totally fine to dislike the movies of Dennis Villeneuve. However, the notion that Villeneuve favors vacuous spectacle to the detriment of narrative is, in my opinion, completely...It's totally fine to dislike the movies of Dennis Villeneuve. However, the notion that Villeneuve favors vacuous spectacle to the detriment of narrative is, in my opinion, completely unsubstantiated by an honest appreciation of his work.
I find his stories unquestionably "meaty".
It is possible that you're mistaking brevity for silence and implication with dullness.
Some like Bruce Willis, Clint Eastwood, Humphrey Bogart, or Jodie Foster. Others might prefer James Stewart, Daniel Day-Lewis, or Meryl Streep. Contention versus extension. Film noir versus screwball comedy. It's a difference in affinity, not in quality or sophistication. I am in both camps myself. Either way, it's perfectly fine.
-
Comment on Nazis mingle openly at CPAC, spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories and finding allies in ~society
fredo Link ParentWhat is the recent Tildes history on that topic?What is the recent Tildes history on that topic?
-
Comment on Nazis mingle openly at CPAC, spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories and finding allies in ~society
fredo Link ParentOh yeah that makes total sense for our current historical context. Thanks for explaining.Oh yeah that makes total sense for our current historical context. Thanks for explaining.
-
Comment on Nazis mingle openly at CPAC, spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories and finding allies in ~society
fredo (edited )Link ParentI think I get the phrase, but it also seems to assume Nazis to be way more subtle and sophisticated than they are in real life. As if they slowly infiltrated society through complicated deceit...I think I get the phrase, but it also seems to assume Nazis to be way more subtle and sophisticated than they are in real life. As if they slowly infiltrated society through complicated deceit when historically their manipulation is way more violent and forceful.
I assume there's a deeper meaning that eludes me.
I should notice that the article is about a personality disorder and bipolar is a mood disorder. Mixing personality disorders and mood disorder in the same argument like that is not very sound. They are too dissimilar.
This comment can be applied to the comment above yours as well in regards to depression.