Peekashoe

The metaphor meant that, as Trump continues to injure his own supporters, reminding them that he is behaving as a dictator may eventually stop them from resolving cognitive dissonance by being defensive and instead by blaming the culprit. Basically, every time you lead the horse to water is a new opportunity to drink, increasing in urgency over time.

But by all means, help those who want to be helped first.

If the horse won't drink, you just keep leading it to water until it eventually gets thirsty.

Yeah, the article cites that as a control, but it's not at all surprising since "humanity by survey consensus" is accurate to how LLM weighting trained on random human outputs works.

It's impressive up to a point, but you wouldn't exactly want your answers to complex math operations or other specialized areas to track layperson human survey responses.

It's outright nefarious how Fox News carefully manages their viewers' human empathy to evil ends.

For example: When democrats or leftists propose government that helps oppressed people or the poor, objectively good things, Fox will hammer on it being an infringement of freedom, brow-beating viewers with pseudo-intellectualism to shut down any moral objections. At the same time, when we have Trump being the absolute worst human in existence and doing awful things to viewers' literal neighbors or even families, Fox will distract with this missing old lady story (Guthrie?) which is a wholly worthless subject of national attention, but expresses their viewers' remaining empathy and makes the viewers feel like "good" people.

On net, the viewers feel simulated on both "intellectual" and "emotional" levels, but it's perversely always to lead them to contravene their instincts to be good people.

Management: "No, that doesn't work, because employees spend so much time doing the actual work that they lack the vision to know what's good for them. Luckily for them I am not distracted by actual work so I have the vision to save them by making them use AI."

Is the interview only two questions and answers for anyone else?

This is very helpful, thanks!

We mostly play Super Mario Party and tried Jamboree as well on Switch. I haven't really played other ones even though I lived through those prior generations. So maybe I'm just an irredeemable grumpy buzzkill.

Disabling bonus stars is a good point. For the difficulty, not sure if that would work well: The problem is some of the players are inevitably casuals, so increasing the difficulty just means the very narrow part of the game that isn't as random - the mini-games - becomes not fun for them. And the Monopoly-style turn-based board play takes sooooo long, you can't really strategize where to go.

I really do think a Mario Party game with only mini-games so everyone plays all the time would be incredible. But again, maybe I'm just describing Warioware...

I've seen that, so yeah, I get it. But I've also see the game award bonus stars or other random finger-on-the-scale benefits to the player in the lead, which can be even more demoralizing to those that lose. I don't think it's Mario Kart rubber band mechanics, unfortunately.

A related question: What is the least random Mario Party? We often end up playing this when friends come over since I guess I'm the only one who feels like it's too random for anyone to meaningfully "win."

Not to rain on anyone's parade or anything, I'm glad you all and others have fun with it, I just would like to see if there's a version that's more like it's a game of skill than chance.

Or maybe I just want WarioWare...

Strange, I wonder why it shows 7.5m views for me (5 hours after you saw 10m). I wonder if Youtube gives different view counts by region, which would be...interesting.