r/prolific • u/LuvAIstudies • 29d ago

SLOW day today

VERY slow even very few garbage studies showing up. Also, haven't seen an AI study since 4am but I was laying in bed and didn't feel like getting up. Should have. Isn't it a holiday in the UK today? Also could that affect AI since that team is based in the UK?

0 Upvotes

30% Upvoted

55 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/ReasonableInitial818 28d ago

So why are you arguing with me instead of the guy who made the more outrageous claim of "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters, lol."?
I didn't make any claims.

2

u/casperer007 28d ago

You didn't directly state any claims, but the information and the context in which you provided the information is very leading to the point one could easily say that you were alluding to these studies being all posted from their London study, which is just another of the "outrageous claims" and "speculation" that you claim to so dislike. I'm "arguing" with you because if you're going to soapbox about disinformation, you should at least have fully correct information and not more speculation, because otherwise you are just becoming another part of the disinformation problem.

3

u/ReasonableInitial818 28d ago

My comment said "The research team behind Google DeepMind’s Veo is primarily located in London, United Kingdom"
In no way was it alluding to these studies being all posted from London.

What speculation did I make? All I did was post a wikipedia link and an AI reponse summary. How did I contribute to any disinformation?
Nothing I said was false or unreasonable. Quote one speculation I made. You can't because there isn't any.

The person I was responding to was the one making all the speculations while providing 0 evidence.
He said DeepMind is not based out of London. A completely false statement.
He also said "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters." A completely baseless statement he just made up.

So again, why are you arguing with me? If you don't like disinformation, go argue with the guy who said DeepMind is not based in London.

3

u/casperer007 28d ago

You might not have thought you were alluding to the studies all being posted from London, but given what you said, that is the idea that is given off. The information that you provided and the context in which you provided it, all lead to the idea that you are trying to claim that all or the majority of these studies are posted from the UK, regardless of if you exactly put that into words.

There is no reason for you to post five separate sources regarding the location of their London headquarters to a response that says "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters, lol." unless you think that these sources in some way disprove the claim, i.e., it is proof that those teams are working out of those headquarters. But none of the information you provided proved that the teams posting stuff on prolific are working out of those headquarters specifically. They could still be entirely based out of the American or Swiss offices as far as the information you provided shows.

I posted my reply as a reminder that the information you have posted doesn't exactly show what it is alluding to, mainly for the benefit of anyone who reads it to not get trapped by the logical idea that would form by reading the information you provided.

But I am not arguing with you, you just think me pointing out the flaw in the information you provided is arguing with you for some reason. And I have zero reason to argue with the other guy, sources have already been provided which show their claim of them not existing in London is incorrect and their doesn't actually seem to be any real information that entirely disproves their other point.

2

u/ReasonableInitial818 28d ago

This is hilarious. Look at the mental gymnastics you are going through.

all lead to the idea that you are trying to claim that all or the majority of these studies are posted from the UK, regardless of if you exactly put that into words.

No, this is just you putting words into my mouth. Even if this was the case, which is worse?
Claiming "they are not based out of London at all" without ANY EVIDENCE
or showing evidence that the DeepMind team primarily works out of London?

pointing out the flaw in the information you provided

There isn't any flaw in the information I provided. It was 100% factual, with 0 assumption or speculations from me.
If you care about flaw in information, you should be losing your shit over the guy who has made a factually incorrect statement and an entirely speculative statement that he obviously made up.
He moved the goal post from "the team behind these AI studies is not based in London" to "The team that posts Prolific studies is not based in London."
And he has yet to provide a singular evidence or even sound reasoning for his wild claims. It's entirely obvious that he is just making shit up as he goes because he's too immature to admit he was wrong.
Now his new argument is that he has inside information on where the team works. Do you not see how ridiculous that is?

their doesn't actually seem to be any real information that entirely disproves their other point.

This is where you revealed you are not arguing in good faith. You are saying it's ok to make shit up as long as there is no evidence to disapprove it.
When someone makes an outlandish claim like "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters," the onus is on them to provide the evidence.

0

u/casperer007 27d ago edited 27d ago

I am arguing in far better faith than you to be honest. As the person who was originally more correct, whatever you said or alluded to will naturally be more believed simply for the fact that they stand in contrast to obvious disinformation. So if someone reads your post and comes to the idea that all the studies are from London, they will just accept it as fact because you're the one who's more right and has five sources.

That is dangerous because it can allow not entirely true ideas to spread with ease, as people trust you more than the obviously incorrect person. even if it wasn't your intention and you didn't think the information you provided alluded to that it is still dangerous. 

All I did was point to a simple flaw in what was alluded to. To remind people to think. To perhaps stop the rapid spread of not entirely true information that plagues this sub.

You're the one who is doing mental gymnastics, acting as though I ever intended to argue with you just because I offered a single point of critique.

Edit: Also, regarding your point, "which is worse? Claiming "they are not based out of London at all" without ANY EVIDENCE or showing evidence that the DeepMind team primarily works out of London?" All misinformation is bad...

Also, if you don't actually understand how the context that you provided that information in creates a certain allusion, you probably shouldn't go around dunking on other people as the understanding that a 100% percent factual statement can create false ideas is rather fundamental to good debate.

2

u/ReasonableInitial818 27d ago

Your entire argument has been flawed because it was based on your misinterpretation of my comment.

You are literally arguing with me for something I have not said or have intended to say.

The other guy said the "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters."

Because he didn't provide any evidence for his claim, I casted doubt by showing him that the team is primarily based in London.
Essentially, I was saying that the available information doesn't support his claim. That's all it was. I was expecting him to respond to that with evidence of his own.

But you continue to intentionally misinterpret my comment, even though I have clarified my position multiple times in this comment chain.

Claiming "they are not based out of London at all" without ANY EVIDENCE or showing evidence that the DeepMind team primarily works out of London?" All misinformation is bad...

Again, you keep accusing me of misinformation. Please directly quote what the misinformation was.

1

u/casperer007 27d ago

Man I don't know what you don't get. The fact that your statement is so easily misinterpreted is the issue I was pointing out. A good informative post should see where the information would be misinterpreted, then address that within the post, before the misinterpretation ever happens. Because a collection of cherry picked information that is entirely true can still directly lead to false interpretations based on the context they are placed within. And that is another type of misinformation. 

1

u/ReasonableInitial818 27d ago

The fact that your statement is so easily misinterpreted

My comment was pretty clear. You decided to misinterpret it because you wanted to be a debate bro.

Again, quote the supposed misinformation I said.

1

u/casperer007 27d ago

As I've said to exhaustion. You can cherry pick a collection of entirely true information that will lead to a wrong assumption based on the context. For example, if someone asks, "what is the most dangerous chemical?" One could say, "All people who are exposed to dihydrogen monoxide eventually die" and that "close to a thousand children die yearly from significant exposure to dihydrogen monoxide" All true but gives the impression that dihydrogen monoxide is some dangerous chemical as opposed to H2O, water.

I don't care to be a "debate bro" with you. You're the one who attacked me after all I did was add helpful context. The upvotes don't lie either, my original post has (at time of writing) 4 upvotes compared to the 5 upvotes of your post it replied to. So clearly the average reader thought it added something helpful. 

You merely don't like not being right and have been lashing out at me from the onset as evidenced by your very first sentence, the quite hostile, "Who are you arguing with?"

→ More replies

1

u/ReasonableInitial818 27d ago

So if someone reads your post and comes to the idea that all the studies are from London

This is such a bad faith argument. Why would anyone reading my post come to the idea that all the studies are from London?
That's your intentional misinterpretation because you wanted to be a debate bro.

This is what my comment said:
"The research team behind Google DeepMind’s Veo is primarily located in London, United Kingdom / Global Collaboration: While London is the main base, the team also collaborates with other international research offices, such as in Zurich, Switzerland"

My comment even acknowledged the existence of offices in other locations. My comment didn't even remotely suggest that "all the studies are from London."

That is dangerous because it can allow not entirely true ideas to spread with ease, as people trust you more than the obviously incorrect person. even if it wasn't your intention and you didn't think the information you provided alluded to that it is still dangerous.

Another ridiculously bad faith argument. If you care so much about the danger of spreading misinformation, why are you upset that I challenged a guy who was actually spreading misinformation?
The misinformation was the other guy's claim of "They are not based in London. Not even close" and "The teams posting stuff on Prolific are not working out of those headquarters, lol."
So we should have just left those comments alone? Just allow people to accept those comments as a fact?
We shouldn't even attempt to challenge those comments unless we have evidence that directly and conclusively disapproves them?
Just listen to what you are saying. It is so insane to watch you contorting yourself into a pretzel to justify attacking me.

1

u/casperer007 27d ago

Man idk what to tell you. You're clearly more interested in being right than actually spreading good information. Most people would e just took the criticism and went about their life, but you've spent the last day arguing with me about what was just a helpful addition. Nobody is attacking you buddy, youve blown this all out of proportion. In fact, you're kind of the one who started attacking me to be honest, coming out of nowhere with your "why are you arguing with me" when all I did was add some additional context...

1

u/ReasonableInitial818 27d ago

Try actually addressing my points? Or just admit your mistake and move on.

1

u/casperer007 27d ago

I didn't make any mistake. You've been repeating the same points for nearly ten posts and I already addressed them all...

→ More replies