JakenVeina

I think you’re very pretty - especially naked.

Something I've learned about compliments, in general, is to be specific. Like, even outside of the nudity, just "I think you're very pretty" is rather a poor compliment. Leaving it open-ended like that plays into what others have said in this thread, that it can be interpreted negatively.

In this case, the obvious alternative in my mind is "I really like your tattoos." That even opens up the opportunity for a conversation about how she got them and what they mean to her. You could could also complement her hair, as you mentioned you appreciated that as well.

asked her if she’d allow me to explain my obvious fuck-up

This is a very natural reaction on your part, and comes from a good place: you've recognized that you've caused someone pain/harm, and want to help alleviate it. Unfortunately, when it comes to topics where sexuality is involved, I don't think there's any scenario where it helps. Not unless they come to you seeking an apology/explanation. The most helpful thing for most people, in this scenario, is to have a little contact as possible with the person who made them uncomfortable. Even if you're being genuine about this, most people aren't.

I tried to explain to X again that I wasn’t sexualising her in any way

I think this is especially not going to help, because it's not an apology. A real, genuine apology for a situation like this involves you recognizing that you did, in fact, do wrong to someone (which, again, in this case, I think you do recognize), so an apology HAS to focus on that.

For me, a true apology has to consist of 3 things:

• Contrition (I.E. "I'm sorry")
• Understanding (what you did that was wrong, and how it was wrong)
• Amends (what/how you're going to do better in the future)

Focusing on explaining your side of the story screws up the "understanding" part. It makes it about what SHE did wrong ("you reacted without knowing the full story") instead of what YOU did wrong ("I didn't consider that my words would make you uncomfortable"). Alternatively, it's "you shouldn't be feeling this way, because you don't know the whole story" instead of "I shouldn't have made you feel this way". Even though that's not what you meant to say, that's an entirely understandable way to interpret it.

Explaining your side of the story can still be part of this, but it comes under the "Amends" category. I.E. "I wasn't trying to sexualize you, so I need to work on avoiding sexualizing language" or "I need to work on choosing my words more carefully, I should be able to compliment someone without it coming off as a sexual thing."

Anyway, that's just my 2 cents. If everything you've told us is accurate, I think you're genuinely a fine person, and you just need to file this one away as a learning experience, the best you can. Nothing more to be done about it now.

What'd you have for dinner?

A) And yet, not long after, Andor was massively successful.

B) Then stop making games exclusively based off of third party IPs.

Seems like a jab at CBS prioritizing those kinds of shows over the largely-more-popular Late Show. Alternatively, maybe making a jab at those being the best that CBS has to offer.

These days, mostly for reddit mirror bots.

I dunno what people's obsession is with Lululemon, and I really don't care, but that fucking bot alone is like 5% of lemmy/all, these days.

This appears to be a rare proper use of machine-learning tech.

No, they did not ask ChatGPT to whip them up a concrete mix. They (in co-operation with engineers) trained a mathematical model specifically for the task of predicting the performance of concrete mixes, in order to narrow down the number of mixes to do (time-intensive) real-world testing on. With a focus on also predicting the carbon-emission impact of the mixes.

This is the kind of technology we need more of. Not LLM slop.

Just northeast of coal lake. Around the giant pillar with the SAM node on top.

EDIT: Wrong post. This is the starter area in Northern Forest. The north-facing cliffside with all the iron nodes, overlooking the canyon.

Every situtation is different, but in general, It's the same as the "innocent until proven guilty" concept: I'd rather give money to someone whose being dishonest than not give it to someone who really needs it. Cause I appreciate how close ANY of us are to homelessness and destitution in this world. My own generosity is my own generosity, not determined by the honesty, or lack thereof, of others.

Add a submission fee that gets refunded as part of the bounty payout, or if the reviewer otherwise judges the submission as obviously legitimate.

Donate all fee proceeds to charity, if you want to counter the any incentive to deny submissions for financial gain.

In theory, that's what the control questions are for. You start with questions where the examiner knows the subject isn't lying, to establish a baseline, and lies are only determined by identifying deviations from that.

Still a debunked technology, at the end of the day. There"s too many assumptions still baked into tbe premise, and too many inaccuracies in the tech.

This track always struck me as bizarre, within the album, but I eventually grew to love it.

Yup.