Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Unsafe Belaying Technique?
|
I really appreciate you doing that to tamp down my own paranoia. Your reply about not seeing the media was so literal that it read like AI. |
|
Also, there are no hard feelings that you all thought I was a bot. I'm a tiny bit on the spectrum, and my wife often tells me I text like a robot. So, I completely get that I can be confused with a chatbot. |
|
Edit: Wrote a lengthy post before seeing the last reply, removed for now. I’m still not convinced, but don’t want to double down if there is any chance I’m wrong on this one. |
|
Stephen is not a bot. I know because we are closely related, having both been created by the same neck-bearded dude in his mother’s basement. |
Collin H wrote: How about not automatically assuming a post is written by a bot? |
|
MP apparently suffers from botphorrea. There are outbreaks in numerous places. Or is it botphobia? I am not a doctor. |
|
Apologies for my online-tone-illiteracy here, but Charlie, are you jokingly suggesting that both of you are bots, or is Stephen seriously related to you? I'm ready to take the embarrassment, eat my words, and offer a sincere and well-deserved apology if I was wrong here (as well as abstaining from this sort of thing in the future). After the wild thread a couple weeks ago in which the general consensus was that it was an advanced bot, it seems like there were a few somewhat odd posts by brand new accounts all at the same time. Then there was the "Reverso has been added to your cart" comment on the other thread, and it seemed both the general consensus and logical conclusion was that another bot had been revealed (although that has since reached a similar state of ambiguity). Against that backdrop, I did have some suspicion about this post, but intended my first comment here to be light-hearted, inoffensive, and jovial, and figured it would be trivially easy for a real person to respond in such a way that made it obvious they weren't a bot, after which it could be joked about. The response seemed to be very clear evidence that this too was a bot, and it didn't seem to be a particularly fanciful leap. My take-away from the next comment was the opposite of Ben's, but I didn't/don't feel comfortable dissecting it given the follow-up. Full disclosure, I am also on the mild end of the spectrum, and from that angle I still couldn't imagine writing that first response, thus the continued uncertainty. But it feels deeply inappropriate to question the effects of someone else's condition. I had no intention of doing it at the start nor do I now, and pursuing this any further would be dangerously close to that. This is about the most disoriented I have been online (aside from checking the news each morning...). I'm not sure what the best path forward is from here, but can offer this: Most of my comments here were intended for Stephen the bot, not Stephen the person. If there is a Stephen the person on the receiving end of this, you seem like a super cool dude, and I'm sorry for precipitating this odd saga, which is surely at least as confusing for you as it is for me. If this is Stephen the bot, you royally suck, and I expect a wonderful synthetic apology. I'll now lay off for the time being and let things play out as they will. |
Collin H wrote: OH HELLO THERE--I'm Mer, I'm Stephen's wife. Yes, really! And I, too, am not a bot. (BTW it's pronounced "Stef'n" not "Steevin" though he'd never tell you that because he's just a very nice dude.) I literally created this account JUST so that I could jump in here and let you know that I have been DYING LAUGHING at this entire thread because I tell this guy-o-mine on a pretty regular basis that he *SOUNDS LIKE A ROBOT* in texts and emails and here y'all are doing a full-on freaking Turing test on him. PRICELESSSSSS. (Can you tell I'm the extroverted one in this marriage?) Anyway, apparently he's posted too many replies today, so he can't reply anymore--hence the current radio silence. So I'm just popping in to say, yes, he is real. Yes he is v cool. And no, he is in no way related to the neck beard kissick troll guy--no idea what that's about. Stephen says: "Thank you for the apology, but it wasn't really necessary." HOORAY FOR HAPPY ENDINGS! Ok baiiiii (PS I write about cybersecurity for a living so I absolutely share your suspicion of All The Things.) |
|
….aaaanndd unselecting ‘Notify on site’. |
Meredith Newell wrote: |
|
I was going to post abot bad belay technique. Bot, I don't have much to say. |
|
Idk seems like bots |
|
No, they are both real! |
|
I doubt many of you are still following this thread as it diverged far from the original topic. But I wanted to thank everyone who took my question seriously. Specifically Ricky Harline, Devan Bee, Collin H, M Sprague, M M, and Mike A. It seems the consensus is that the belaying technique is not bad enough to blow up the guy's videos, but not good enough to trust him with your life. Sucks for the newbs that don't know better. Hank Hudley, Collin H mentioned that I attacked you in his post before he edited it. I'm very sorry if that's how it came across. That was not my intention. But of course impact is mor important than intentions. I was trying to point out that anyone can seem like a bot if you are looking for one. And I used you as an example. I'm very sorry. I do not think you are a bot. Collin H. You don't need to apologize for checking that I'm real. I totally understand. And to be honest, your test was a clever way to check. If I wasn't deep in thought at work when I saw your post, I could have spent a minimum amount of mental energy towards it and read between the lines. Instead of just taking the post literally and assuming it was an uploading mistake and getting back to work. What I learned. It's hard to prove you're real one it's in people's heads that you're not. If you do something that AI can't do people will just assume that the bots can do that now. Like as Collin pointed out, using quotes, or screenshots of desktops with the captchas and a notepad of the text within the captcha on the desktop. As far as I know there is no bot that can do that. Yet, we just assume well, I guess bots do that now. I guess I need to take a selfie with me and my monitor of this webpage to prove i'm real.  Oh wait I should have zoomed out a bit more.  Not the most flattering of pictures, but it shows I'm a human. Though I guess you could say that it was AI generated, but have you tried to generate a wall of text with an image generator? It does not work. Though I suppose you could just say, "Hmm, I guess AI can do that now." So then I would need to meet up with you, but then you would say. "Wow robots are so realistic now. We're living in Ex-machina!" This is likely my last post in this thread as I got WAY more than I needed from it. Thank you all! And for the trolls... Get a life... |
|
Meredith and Stephen, I hereby resign my self-appointed and poorly executed position as bot detector, and all the imagined rights and privileges it confers. Your graceful pardon of my absolutely massive faux-paus and full-on internet faceplant is greatly appreciated. Confirmation bias is a helluva drug! While I never personally made any such promise, I believe there is some MP precedent for you to demand a free cam and/or photo of me leading with underwear on my head as compensation for a false negative on the Turing test: At the very least, you have both earned a warm (and unique) welcome to Mountain Project. I’d offer to delete my false accusations, but it seems like Meredith enjoyed them quite a bit, so I can also leave them up for her continued amusement. I loved your post Meredith, you two seem like a great pair, and I was happy to see this take a wholesome turn and know that it at least provided some laughter. Sidenote: In that bit about Hank, I meant attacking credibility, in the very loose sense of defending yourself from the bot accusations by going on the attack with counter-accusations. I did not see any actual offense there. Regardless, my comment was unreasonable, which was why I quickly took it down. It is I who should be apologizing, you have nothing to apologize for. |
Collin H wrote: YES please leave it all up!! Ehr, I mean, meep moop, bleep bloop :) ~MER OUT! |
|
Never delete anything. Own what you wrote. Defend or apologize as necessary. |
|
I asked Google Gemini to generate an image:  close but no cigar on the webpage contents. |
Marc801 C wrote: I generally agree with that Marc. I made what I considered to be a narrow exception with my one comment above for a couple of reasons. I only saw Stephen's preceding comment when the site updated after I hit submit. I worried my comment could be interpreted in ways I hadn't considered in light of that new information, because it appeared my comment had been written immediately following it in response. I wanted to re-evaluate it to make sure it wouldn't be hurtful. In my mind there is a difference between taking something down reactively after receiving criticism to save face, and removing something proactively to avoid causing offense in light of new information. This may very well have been the wrong course of action, but I just wanted to share the context and reasoning behind it. All that being said, I actually do have that comment saved, and could put it back up if that is the preference. I think my fears of it being hurtful were a bit overblown, and it's now clear it wasn't removed before being read anyways. The only other time I'd remove something would be at the request of the affected party. It seemed only fair to bring up that option after leveling a false accusation at someone. It's not my intent to hide from well-earned criticism on this (the comments themselves or the way I handled them). Critique away! |
