Zancarius (u/Zancarius)

Zancarius commented on How AI is unlocking ancient texts nature.com/articles/d4158... · Posted by u/Marceltan

mmooss · 8 months ago

I agree, but lets remember that the software repeats patterns, it doesn't so much innovate new ones. If you get too dependent on it, theoretically you might not break as much new ground, find new paradigms, discover the long-mistaken assumption in prior scholarship (that the software is repeating), etc.

Zancarius · 8 months ago

Human proclivities tend toward repetition as well, partially as a memory/mnemonic device, so I don't see this as disadvantageous. For example, there's a minor opinion in biblical scholarship that John 21 was a later scribal addition because of the end of John 20 seeming to mark the end of the book itself. However, John's tendencies to use specific verbiage and structure provides a much stronger argument that the book was written by the same author—including chapter 21—suggesting that the last chapter is an epilogue.

Care needs to be taken, of course, but ancient works often followed certain patterns or linguistic choices that could be used to identify authorship. As long as this is viewed as one tool of many, there's unlikely much harm unless scholars lean too heavily on the opinions of AI analysis (which is the real risk, IMO).

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

o11c · 9 months ago

Your case is relatively unusual and unlike general conversations, since you have:

  - a topic that everybody knows will be the focus, and
  - an audience that actively values your conversation.

Outside your core discussion time is when you'll see general discussion tropes. If people are (generally) neither leaving nor arriving, in my experience we see transient circles of 6-8 that split (if more than 8 people, or if multiple topics persist) and merge (if fewer than 6 people). The article's limit of 4 doesn't apply if movement between different groups is considered a feature rather than a bug.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

That's exactly it, and I really like your observation that the "limit of 4" doesn't apply in some cases. Before/after class, we have the exact experience you mentioned here where people will transiently go around talking to different groups (often 2 or 3 individuals, sometimes more where there are more listeners than speakers).

What's really interesting about your observation is how the rule-of-thumb breaks down when the conversation is limited to more confined topics or: If the individuals see each other with some regularity outside the group setting (no need to engage in extended conversation about who's doing what) or some of the conversations involve topics brought up in the course of the class.

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

conductr · 9 months ago

The circle shape makes you feel engaged and able to converse with everyone so it feels cohesive. It's also pretty obvious you were arranged in that shape to emphasis a group conversation activity is taking place.

Kind of the opposite as when you get seated at a restaurant in a long rectangle table. You immediately know it will be difficult to talk to the whole table and will have multiple conversations taking place. If you're at one end, you'll likely only talk to 3-4 people. If you're at the center, you might talk to 3-4 to the left and right but they'll be different conversations. Not that this is a strict law of table talk, just kind of what usually takes place. Sometimes there's something that comes up that gets everyone's attention and the whole table is shouting. An even more extreme example, is a bar top seating, where you are just a line facing the same direction. You might only talk to your neighbors and possibly their neighbor but it's not great at facilitating larger group discussion.

If you ever go to a banquet or wedding where they have round tables but a very tall floral decor piece thing in the middle, it completely breaks the circle advantage. I think eye contact and your ability to convey body language is a major component.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

I really hate trying to carry conversation in restaurants for that reason, and because the background noise levels can often get to a point where you can only hear the person sitting right next to you.

You're absolutely right that 1) group composition, 2) room structure, and 3) motive(s) are all important factors. As someone else observed, having a "discussion leader" is also important in that sort of setting.

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

Lammy · 9 months ago

This is the social upside of something like a “blunt rotation” forcing every person to periodically break from carrying the conversation.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

I'm going to shamelessly borrow your phrasing, because what you've described is exactly what happens: It's a rotation through other participants so neither the study leader nor other individuals have to "[carry] the conversation." It's really interesting, because it fosters conversation that can lead to interesting questions, observations, or other information that might not otherwise come to light. There are some significant deficiencies, of course, but I think works fairly well depending on the group.

Where it breaks down is if one person starts to dominate the conversation for the duration of the class and carries it off-topic, or if someone becomes combative. So, the group composition and personalities can influence the relative success.

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

stevage · 9 months ago

It's interesting that you see a large group of people having one conversation as a success. Personally I really dislike those situations and would much rather it splinter into smaller groups.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

I think it depends. In the context of a discussion class, it makes sense, because you don't want to deviate too far from the purpose of the study. As someone else pointed out, it doesn't work as well for unstructured conversation.

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

kstenerud · 9 months ago

Is there a clear leader/facilitator in that discussion class? Someone who keeps the discussion "on track" and prevents it from wandering from the chosen topic?

That would be different from the spontaneous, unstructured conversations the article is talking about.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

Yup, and that's another reason it works so well.

Now, it does break down somewhat when the core discussion is over or if someone is a bit disruptive (which has happened recently).

As a sibling comment to yours wrote, it DOES help that the topic is understood among everyone present, there is a clear intent to the gathering, and everyone has approximately the same motives.

Zancarius commented on Conversations are better with four people thetimes.com/article/why-... · Posted by u/nomilk

em-bee · 9 months ago

in my experience it is more dynamic than that. based on tech meetings that i have been to, it depends on the topic currently being discussed. larger groups will break apart if not everyone is interested. it also depends on the arrangement. if a few people stand in a circle and more join the circle, the conversation won't split, because for that to happen they would actually have to leave the circle and create a new one.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

This is a really interesting observation, because I'm in an adult discussion class in Sunday school that is arranged like a circle, and I've been trying to figure out why it seems that structure works so well at limiting conversational divergence.

It seems that when everyone is forced to look at each other, it's harder to divest from the main conversation without drawing your attention away from the remainder of the group. It seems better for fostering discussion with a single speaker at a time since everyone can look at that person all at once.

It's not perfect but for larger groups the "circle strategy" definitely seems to work well.

Thanks for sharing!

Zancarius commented on Why I hate the index finger (1980) pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/arti... · Posted by u/consumer451

dnsco · 9 months ago

TL;DR nerves are really weird.

It tingles all the time. There's a ton of "referred pain". It frequently feels like there is a dental drill going of in my face, when it's not painful, it's a a persistent nagging tickle, on my cheek/temple/around my eye.

It gets reynauds phenomena, my house is 68F 20C right now, but my finger is freezing/painful because of how cold it is, this happens pretty much any time I wash my hand, so even in the summer when there's a slight breeze I'm hiding my hand in my pocket for warmth.

When I bang it on things it really hurts, and like this paper says it's extended basically all the time when I'm trying to use my hand for other things.

When I use it to grab things, it feels really weird, so I've kind of trained myself to keep it out of the way. This paper says cut it off, which the few other orthopedists I've talked to have not advised, but at this point, it's been a decade, and seeing a doctor be like "dude, the thing that's only there to make your hand more precise, is actually making your hand way less precise and detracting from your quality of life, cut it off", is a perspective I'm happy to hear. I manage mostly alright, but it's been a decade of major annoyance at best.

Zancarius · 9 months ago

This is really fascinating to me, because it explains some things.

I have a friend who crushed the tip of one of her fingers, but it wasn't amputated. She's described sensations very similar to yours, presumably from nerve damage. I never asked a bunch of questions about it, and now I wish I had after reading this post.

If it ever comes up in conversation again, may I share a link to your comment with her?

Zancarius commented on James Earl Jones has died variety.com/2024/film/new... · Posted by u/birriel

OhMeadhbh · a year ago

I know everyone is talking about how he voiced Vader, but when I think of him, I think of Strangelove and Hunt for Red October. I didn't spend a lot of time in the fleet, but what I did was rather boring and/or annoying; the idea that something exciting would happen in the CIC is probably why I often think of the line "Now, understand, Commander, that torpedo did not self-destruct. You heard it hit the hull. And I was never here."

Zancarius · a year ago

Hunt for Red October for me also!

Zancarius commented on 2.9B hit in one of largest data breaches; full names and SSNs exposed tomsguide.com/computing/o... · Posted by u/purpleblue

ryandrake · a year ago

We "just" need to stop pretending they are secret like passwords and using them to authenticate that someone is who they say they are. Banks should not be issuing loans based on a bunch of personal information (including SSN) that the collected and concluded "Yup, that data matches itself--therefore you are actually you!"

Zancarius · a year ago

The whole system is broken in hilarious ways.

Unrelated but similar: I live in a rural area, so we don't get street delivery of mail. Instead, we need to apply for a PO Box. Every year, to verify that only residents are using the PO Boxes, the Post Office sends out a renewal form, and you have to show up with a current bill and your driver's license. The latter makes sense—the State, presumably, goes through the validation of your address, and you sign their forms under penalty of perjury, etc., the the former is hilarious.

So, to receive the very bill used to authenticate "current residency," the bill has to go through the Post Office (remember what I said about no street delivery? anything that's mailed to our street address goes... to our PO Box!), and then we show it to them to validate that we are receiving email to that address—which cannot be independently validated outside the driver's license.

The PO Box we're renewing is therefore used to validate itself. And the fun part is that if you delay in returning the form, they'll block off your box.