I have low affect so it’s usually along the lines of “Wow, so you aren’t going to wear my skin like a mask. You’re actually nice. I never would have guessed.”
Or your dad could accept that he’s going to travel a tiny bit further than he originally intended, and reroute with a u-turn, or a block circle, or a parking lot turn, or something similar. No invasive lane change. No need to apologise for an invasive lane change. No need for a special horn to communicate an apology for an invasive lane change. You don’t need to apologise for something you don’t make into someone else’s problem.
I would advise you not to ruminate on the incident, even with the friend. Just hang out and chat with them. It’s about reminding yourself you are not defined by what one particular person felt about you on one particular day. When you are feeling that urge to hide away and shut down, you need someone to connect with, face to face if possible, on a voice call at barest minimum. Just connect.
Do you have someone you can trust to talk to in person, like a friend? Sometimes the best balm for the burn of a rejection is the acceptance of a friend.
Inexpensive, and little setup, with no steep learning curve?
Off the top of my head:
The invention and continued allowance of advertising-supported media. It has done nothing but harm.
I got some pushback when I said it before but I think one really simple law should be put into place which, while it won’t fix everything, might help with one of the important issues that lead to other issues. Make it illegal for an LLM to output the word ‘I’ with a repeating fine for every instance of it occuring, preferably starting at 1% of annual revenue. If it can’t seem to use the first person, it won’t sound like a person, which won’t lead to so many of the less technical users thinking it’s sentient or intelligent.
‘Bruh, we literally all came from the poop organisms that survived on space rocks from that one planet that exploded a Brazilian years ago. Why are you being weird?’
Joke answer: condom, in case the driver is very grateful
Real answer: I don’t see a good light on that list. Even in daylight, it can be quite dark in an engine compartment. Trying to use your phone as a flashlight and use a tool at the same time is awful.
If the police torture you, you have some voice. You can at least try to find justice. If they kill you, you have none. You’re dead. The gloves are still better.
Yeah, more guns in schools always seemed like a dumb answer to any problem.
I remember hearing about at least one study that said yes, (and it should always be remembered tasers are less lethal, not non-lethal) but I didn’t look into it that deeply. Still, if it’s less people being killed, that still feels like a better result. A living victim of police abuse can speak out. A dead one can be suppressed much more readily.
When I was young and trusted police, I wanted them to have taser gloves because it seemed like it would be better than shooting people. Less death. Harder to drop or have stolen. Now… No, I still prefer this to them just shooting people. Both are bad, but I’d rather see fewer people killed by the police and hope we can find a way to reach zero eventually.
You can look at a pair of meshed gears and understand it just as readily as you can understand a single transformation by running the math on paper with a pencil, but I don’t think anyone will ever be able to comprehend the fullness of any useful-scale model for the same reason they would never comprehend a clockwork with the same number of gears as an LLM has transformers or indices. It’s a non-intuitable space with too much complexity which cannot be simplified without oversimplifying.
One activity occurs in a hazily understood chemical system with near completely unobservable states in interplay with activities and systems which have effects on the main system that are barely recognized, much less fully understood. The other is a constructed, completely defined system with near total observability of states affected by probabilities based on inputs defined by human written, completely known tokenization systems.
Will they next speculate about the similarity of ‘preferences’ between a robot from Japan and the nearest non-terrestrial intelligent species?
*auto-complete
Deregulation-induced anorexia? That’s a new one for me.
This is not a blind choice between adding a minute to one person’s commute or adding ten seconds to five people’s commutes. This is a man who failed to do the most basic, bare minimum cost of driving around in a machine that can and does kill people on a regular basis: paying attention. Others shouldn’t be endangered to save someone from an inconvenience. A sudden, illegal maneuver, even at low speed, introduces more danger and unpredictability where we want less. Why give MORE trust to someone who is actively engaged in demonstrating they should not be trusted?