It's not just a question of experience though. The Neo can be perfectly sufficient for you right now but that doesn't change the fact that Apple obsoletes devices based on RAM.
E.g., the iPhone 15, released 3 years ago, doesn't get Apple Intelligence because it has just 6GB of RAM.
I wouldn't buy a device that is already at the very lowest end of supported hardware the day it's released. It could cut the years of meaningful OS upgrades by half or perhaps even by two thirds.
>doesn't get Apple Intelligence because it has just 6GB of RAM.
This sounds like a feature to me: Apple should provide a upgrade path that disables AI for older hardware that can't run it, and thus not download the models.
You get closer, if necessary to the point your lips almost touch their face. What millions of people have done during decades. And that’s the point, yes.
Just in case you were serious I think they meant clubs like a sewing circle, crown green bowling, tennis, the local brass band, civic action groups, etc. In other words associations of one kind or another, in tech. terms special interest groups.
Haha, yes. I just keep watching those discussions online it's really predictable how it would go.
The advice for some time was almost universally that one should "volunteer", join "hobby clubs", or even go do "women-centric activities" or even "women-centric events" and "feminist groups" to meet people. Often women would recommend that.
Well, naturally the people doing those activities wouldn't enjoy being approached, and you'd have this parallel online universe where women complain about people approaching them in hobby groups.
The problem is people taking "Join a club" as meaning "The club is a source of women and nothing else"
Very dumb boys then go to the club meeting, immediately try to pick up women, and it doesn't work because that was not the recommendation.
You are supposed to get engaged with a club you care about, participate genuinely, meet new people and make new friendships, and like all of human history, that is very likely to randomly result in you finding someone you hit it off with.
Boys still tend to think they are trying to shotgun pickup lines as a good method.
Basically, the underlying problem is roughly the same in all those situations: You have to understand, respect, and treat the women in those groups the same way you treat anyone else. How often do you join a new tech related club and start hitting on the same sex members of that club for example?
You and the other replier are still pretending that this ridiculously horrible advice is defensible or justifiable by adding endless caveats, conditions and rationalisations to the recommendation.
Volunteering as way to eventually meet woman? It was a stupid idea 5 years ago, still is now.
The actual advice was to widen your social circle and become more well rounded individual. It is not surprising that a heterosexual guy who socializes exclusively in male only group will be able to pair with males only. That creates a situation in which you can create coupling like normal people do. Which incidentally did not used to be "hit at random girl you just encountered".
> Well, naturally the people doing those activities wouldn't enjoy being approached, and you'd have this parallel online universe where women complain about people approaching them in hobby groups.
In here, you are avoiding the whole "observing a big group of people over long periods of time when they don't pretend to charm you" thing. Which is the core thing that started the whole thread.
Yes, it is also possible to pretended to be friend in order to make a pass. Which is not the same thing as being a friend who has romantic interest. The trick for you here is that you need to image women/girls as full people and normal relationship with them.
That girl is looking for genuine authentic connection, you are looking for sexual access. And in that case, part of your evaluation should involve searching for women who want those physical only relationships.
But again, the thread was about forming long term relationships, this is different matter.
It's amazing how people in this website can go "it's all very easy you just misunderstood the point" and mansplain every single topic that appears in here, when they themselves can't even understand or follow a simple discussion.
I blame Youtube and coaching culture. Everyone thinks they're an expert now and must spread their genius.
Part of the effect of spending time around other people is that you get to know them, discover which ones aren't creepy, and develop connections with them. And, over the age of 25, the personal connection starts to matter more and more for people than "Are they hot or not?"
Nightclubs are also pretty cool though. Especially ones that have chill-out areas a bit away from the music. But I'm biased as I live in Berlin at the moment.
There's certainly a spectrum (and the spectrum is already recognized: Google flat bans certain categories of information from being searchable via its tools to the best of their ability).
But you've sort of hit the nail on the head: there are consequences to building these things, and consequences to not doing that.
Up-thread is, I think, making the fine point that the bad can certainly outweigh the good (you'll note a distinct lack of "Google but for CSAM," at least outside the dark web, and that's I think because the good/harm tradeoff there is self-evident). My intent was just to put down a reminder counterweight that the good without the harm is likely also impossible.
Google makes errors of judgment. They also make straight-up unforced errors (breaking their 10-year commitment to the Chromebook platform, at their scale, is just burning credibility at a quantity that I cannot imagine is going to save them enough money to justify it unless their intent is to exit the educational space completely; 10 years isn't a random number, it's the kind of number that gives educational institutions the confidence that an investment in platform is long-term, and breaking that commitment factors into the calculus of those institutions trusting Google for any and all future purchases).
Anthropic is a private company that is losing money hand over fist. Google is a profitable public company that doesn't have that luxury (at the scale Anthropic/OoenAI are losing money)
reply