something_else

Ironic

I genuinely thought this was a parody, I thought you were mocking OP until the last sentence 😂

A good fallback for starting a conversation with anybody is a Barnum statement. Statements that almost everybody feels like apply to them but still sound personalised “You look like you’re either gonna be the nicest person I’ve ever met, or like you’re going to ruin my life” It’s somewhat manipulative but as a means to an end for getting into a deep conversation it works well

I know this first hand. I was a loner most of my time between high school and my early twenties. I resorted to going out to bars and clubbing alone to build better social skills. It worked to a degree, but I don’t have a single person from that stage of my life who I still talk to, and I was still deeply insecure at the end of it. I also had baseline social skills already which is why that was even viable. Now I have a solid social circle of 4-5 great friends who I love dearly, and it has almost eliminated my social anxiety. I wish I had prioritised building that first instead of going straight to cold approach. Deep friendships are where you learn who you really are and how to express that in a way that is appealing to others.

I’m not talking about social circle game, I’m talking about making genuine connections with people and building friendships without the sole purpose of it all being to get laid. The kind of friendships where you can actually go and do social stuff together and just have a good time. That’s the path to developing basic social skills if you have none. This teaches you basic social dynamics, and most importantly it teaches you that socialising is actually fun, and not just a barrier in your way to getting laid. Cold approach can be good for developing social skills, but if you’re weird or cringy and don’t possess even basic social skills it’s just going to make it worse for you. You’re going to be continually told how weird or strange or awful you are which will totally destroy your self-image. Not to mention in a small town you will end up with a reputation.

This is not a downside! This is called growing up

No reputation is also a problem as it means no status. No status + weird gimmicky approaches will put you solidly in the loser category in the mind of most women Women don’t really want a nobody, or somebody with nothing to lose. They want a man who is somebody. You don’t need celebrity status to clear that bar, a good group of friends that you do fun social stuff with is enough. You have the wit to be entertaining and sociable, this is something that’s definitely achievable for you and it’s where you should direct your energy if you want to get laid. I guess if you’re not doing these gimmicky approaches too often you may have avoided a negative reputation for now, but certainly don’t risk tarnishing your reputation anymore. In a town of 60k people most people know each other and stories about the weird guy who pretended he was married to try and get laid is exactly the kind of story a girl shares with her friends and laughs about

Dude, in a small city like that you’ve got to approach this by building a social circle. With some of the stuff you’ve told us about here I’m willing to bet you already have a fairly negative reputation in a town that small As I’ve said, you’re spinning your wheels because you’re trying to learn to drive in a car without any tyres. Learn basic social skills and get a social circle going and you might actually get somewhere.

lmao

Thank you

Leo's comment says nothing about liking anything. He specifically says 'disliking a thing before understanding the thing is backwards', implying that you should understand something before you dislike it. There is no mention of liking at all. You literally just misunderstood what Leo was saying. Or you interpreted it that way because you wanted to see it that way which, ironically, is the exact thing about bias that is problematic.

You've got to be trolling at this point, right? 😂 The whole point is that you need to be relatively neutral and unknowing towards something before you form an opinion on it, if you want that opinion to have any chance of being accurate. You don't like it, you don't dislike it. You are neutral and open minded. Claiming you are self-aware of your own bias and that you don't let it cloud your judgment is, to be frank, laughable. People spend their entire lives aiming to reach a state like that and are still plagued with blind spots. Right now you are at the peak of a Dunning-Kreuger chart. And, again, taste/preference are entirely separate thing. Being biased against women in the way you often present it is not a 'preference' or a 'taste'.

🫪 Disliking strawberries is a personal preference. Disliking or discriminating against someone because they’re a woman is prejudice. You’re conflating completely different things by hiding them under the word “preference.”

To a degree. Yes, bias can be useful in a genuine survival situation. But if someone breaks into your room, you have direct evidence that person is dangerous. That is completely different from being generally prejudiced against men because one might hypothetically attack you. Or being generally prejudice against women because the only value you see in them is as being meat to stick your dick in. Some biases being useful does not make all biases justified. Context matters a lot. In the vast majority of cases (e.g. the bias you show on this form towards women) your survival is not threatened enough to justify acting on bias instead of truth and understanding.

Yea, that was the exact point being made. Most people are incredibly biased. That's the default. Being wise involves being acutely aware of your own biases, not denying their existence or claiming that you're above them. That is delusion. Bias is incredibly subtle and tricky. It grabs the balls of your rational mind and puts them in a vice, then forces it to produce an endless stream of very logical reasons for why your biases are the right biases.

If it were logical then people in sub-Saharan Africa would be the most regenerated and healthiest in the world. Yet instead it is one of the places most plagued by disease and health problems. I believe fasting or dry fasting could have mental benefits in the sense that it will put you in unusual or spiritually meaningful state of mind. What I don’t believe is that it will do anything remotely helpful for the body. There is no logical reason it would because water is foundational to every single regenerative process in your body. I’m sorry but you shouldn’t be taking health advice from YT grifters Also, you can’t just say “your comparison has lots of flaws” and make it true. You have to actually list them out. Water is to humans as oil is to cars.

"fertile" 😬😬😬 As the fertile Gen Z women would say, "cringe"

It makes no sense that this would be good for your body, let alone curing any ailment. Water is required for every basic function in your body, I struggle to see how you would function better without it. It's like saying that your car will function better after you drain all the oil out of it and drive it around for a week.

I've recently been diagnosed with ADHD. When I look back on my life, especially childhood and early adulthood, it really should have been much more obvious. However it never really occurred to me that a lot of my troubles could be caused by ADHD until the last year or two. I thought a lot of the stuff I struggled with was just 'normal' and that everybody was like that. Anyway, I've been prescribed Elvanse (Vyvanse for people in the US) and it will be arriving shortly. I have tried Ritalin and Vyvanse a couple of times before (just as a one off) and based on that I feel like consistently taking these meds has the potential to be life changing. It was truly insane to experience what it is like to have a mind that just does what you want it to do instead of fucking around all of the time and self-sabotaging you at every turn. I also notice that they significantly improved my social anxiety and made me realise that most of my social anxiety came not from shame, but from a lack of ability to trust my mind to pay attention and behave during conversations. I'm curious if anybody here both has ADHD, and has experience with ADHD meds and the effects they had? Thanks

You're not entirely wrong, but it's flexible enough that you can give it specific design requirements which are unique to you and it'll implement them. You can also give it several other websites as inspiration and it'll create something unique that draws inspiration from all of of them.

Thanks for sharing your experience! I relate a lot to the bullying part. What meds did you try out of curiosity? And re people pleasing, I had people pleasing symptoms when I was a late teen, but I'm a lot better with that now than I used to be. Interestingly I find the meds make me people please less. I realised a lot of my people pleasing was because I found it easy to be a people pleaser as a backup when my brain couldn't focus on or keep track of a conversation well enough to push back on stuff I disagreed with. The thing that really convinced me to go and get an ADHD test though was thinking about how chaotic, disorganised, impulsive and loud I was as a young kid before I even started getting bullied or anything. If anything the bullying is probably what suppressed my external ADHD symptoms because I became very quiet after that, but still extremely disorganised. By disorganised I'm talking like carrying a schoolbag full of everything I needed for the entire year instead of only taking what I need every day, no folders per subject, my school bag was just one big pit of random papers. Forgetting to do homework every week, or leaving it to the last minute. Locking parent's keys inside the house or car. Once I flooded the house because I started running a bath and forgot about it. I would talk about random shit that interested me for hours but couldn't hold a basic conversation. I find it hard to explain that with anything other than executive dysfunction, it can't really be learned behaviour because I was young and both my parents are pretty normal, loving, and not controlling at all. At least in the UK, having symptoms when you are young (between 5 and 10) is almost a requirement for getting diagnosed because they want to ensure it is genetic and not learned.

You can make it do other stuff, but if you give it no design guidance it defaults to this colour scheme

Me: "The outcome is comparable because X and Y" You: "No it isn't" Me: "Why" You: "Because it isn't, just saying it is doesn't mean it is" ===== That you say I am wrong, doesn't mean I am wrong. You need to actually address my argument: X: Billions of years of evolution encodes massive amounts of data into a human brain. This is comparable to LLM training on billions of rows of data. Y: LLMs learn a new programming language through examples, practice and documentation. This is comparable to humans learning a new programming language through examples, practice and documentation. I can think of plenty of ways to poke holes in my own argument here, it has flaws. But it's not worth my time if you're just going to state I'm wrong without engaging with what I'm saying at all.

Why?

A human can't suddenly just program in C++ without somebody teaching them how to do it, or at least having access to documentation. So yes, we need examples too. Billions of rows of training data is to an LLM what billions of years of evolution is to a human brain. The end result is the same, both end up in a state where they are capable of learning a previously unseen programming language from documentation and trial and error.