I think you could only really faithfully adapt the really dramatic arguments. Like ones with real world consequences. Closest thing I can think of is probably the saga of Nicole Shanahan, Musk, and Brin. RFK Jr also shows up in this story.
Otherwise you’d just make gimmicks based off of internet archetypes. Keyboard Warrior, White Knight, etc.
Fair! Since you’re coming in with lotr references, maybe pumpkinware. Named after the pumpkin in one of the endings of PJ’s RotK where the hobbits are in a pub and everyone else is impressed with the large pumpkin, oblivious to what the present could have been.
Also, in order to grow a large pumpkin, you probably gotta ignore/prune all other pumpkins and just feed the one growing. So there’s that too.
If there isn't a term, maybe you get to invent one! Just exploring the concept a bit here to try to generate leads, in case you wanted them.
To rephrase your concept, you have A) things that are collective attention thieves/time sinks for a particular field or industry, and B) this vaporware appears to have a good profit-to-opportunity cost ratio, but in reality, it does not.
You could focus on just A), with a direct naming of "collective attention thief". You can substitute "collective" with "industry" and "attention thief" with "time sink", etc. Or something like "kleptoware" or "sinkware", "holetech", etc.
Focusing on just B), you might come up with something like "bubbleware", "bubble" indicating that the vaporware has inflated value.
Combining the two, you might name it after a scam. Maybe "pigeonware" after the pigeon drop scam, or "fawneyware" or "fiddleware" etc., there are many scams you could use.
“Consciousness requires semantic understanding” - I don’t see a way to operationalize this that GPT-4 fails. It misunderstands some words, and so does every human I know. You give GPT a definition, it can use it about as well as a school child.
i would interrogate this plus “intelligence” a little more. LLMs don’t “understand” in the way that we do, and personally I don’t think that they really understand at all. A dictionary containing examples also basically passes this test, for example. LLMs also don’t really have “intelligence”.
Anyway we’re very far away from figuring out consciousness anyway. Claims about LLMs being conscious are meaningless marketing.
Well chat, since this guy has bowed out, let me just say: I’ve been working with this description, per wikipedia:
In linguistics and grammar, a pronoun is a word or a group of words that one may substitute for a noun or noun phrase.
Yeah obviously chat is going to appear as a noun in all those sentences, because it is functioning as a noun. It is sometimes a pronoun. You could just swap out “chat” in any of my guy’s statements with any pronoun and hey now there are no pronouns. We’re free!
And uh yeah flowery is clearly erupting. Just absolutely malding over some tiktoker because he said some stuff and flowery didn’t like the tone of his voice. Mad cos he’s stylin on you
bonus points because it sounds like a CBT term (not cognitive behavioral therapy, the other CBT)
“Friends, Romans, countrymen; is this true?” or “Ladies and gentlemen, The Weeknd.”
if you used “y’all” to refer to the groups in these examples, “y’all” is a pronoun.
Addressing someone does not require them to be present or real, so the presence or absence of a literal chat does not somehow transmogrify this noun into a pronoun.
Chat is a metonym (not a pronoun) when you are referring to a group of people in a chatroom, real or imagined. That’s part of the new usage. What’s also part of the new usage is using “chat” but you aren’t thinking about the people you are addressing as part of a chatroom.
Plus we gotta examine the underlying context of how this usage started and how it has evolved. So it starts not as a pronoun when streamers start using it. Then it mutates as people start saying it in real life, outside of a streaming or chatroom context. So let’s say a young child hears someone say “chat, is this true”, and, without looking up what this means or the context, just starts saying it, without knowing what a chatroom is or without a specific audience in mind. I think at that point it becomes a pronoun.
Anyway, none of this is anything to get heated about.
well i mean you are being uncharitable. This is a tiktok, not, like, a paper. “Kind of true” doesn’t mean “absolutely true in all cases across space, time, and other universes”. Yes, he did misidentify “y’all” (it is second person plural) but that just changes what the statement should have meant to “chat is used as a second person plural pronoun”.
I think this analysis is about the usage of “chat is this true/real” outside of streams. Like if someone said out loud “chat is this true” to nobody in particular. Or in like, a meme or something.
Uh, in its contemporary usage in “chat is this true,” it absolutely is a pronoun
(This comment is not really a criticism)
you would not be the first person to look at the etymology of a slur, note that it originally had a different context, and point out that it doesn’t really map 1:1 with its usage.
having not watched the clone wars I can’t comment on specifics with your example.
Anyway, regarding slurs against non-sentient things: “Lemon”, “hunkajunk”, “shitbox” get used for cars, i demand justice for cars!!!
Yeah nah, that’s not what he says at all. In that video, he says: “there is no accepted definition of a fourth person pronoun, here are some concepts that are sometimes referred to as the fourth person, does the modern usage of “chat” fit any of these?” and the answer is: “in some specific ways yes, in other ways no.”
I don’t think he’s the one that started the idea of chat being a fourth person pronoun, I think he’s just discussing the statement and using it as an opportunity to communicate some linguistic concepts, which is cool and good. Also, what’s in your craw, different person?
You can get a mod to insert Weyland-Yutani cells, after a short incubation period you'll see a real burst of improvement.