Your comments lack evidence most of it consists of digging through other people’s comment history and profiling them. I’ve seen you use that in several of your arguments. Never have I once seen you use logic or evidence to state your points.
I never look at someone’s comment history. I judge them for what they said only and I disseminate that without getting personal. I made an exception for you given how you decided to stalk my comment history and I noticed you just do this for everyone.
Yeah, still spamming annoyed replies everywhere including old threads certainly fits the profile of someone unbalanced being angry about being found out.
bro, you went through my comment history. I simply did the same and I responded to a few of your responses that are wrong. I'm not angry man, I just felt you needed a mentor, someone who can point you in the right direction.
You are lying, it's not genuine advice, and you are being intentionally derogatory - since that's how you're handling all your outburst from what I've seen.
2. You create your new account 36 days ago (funnily using the same username style).
3. Suddenly this rare expression is used again! Just a single page in the history of HN search indexing.
4. Incredibly it's also in conjunction with both users saying "Nobody understand how LLMs really work!", which is a rare statement to see in its own right.
5. Incredibly it's also in conjunction where both users do the same appeal to authority by linking to the same Geoffrey Hinton clip, both immediately calling him the godfather/father of AI.
So yeah, it must be your AI clone. And this is just one of the obvious direct connections I noticed, because I actually doubled checked when you denied it. An unsurprising waste of time ofc, but here we are. And this is just on top of having the exact same commenting style and quarrelsomeness.
Dude. You need to calm down. This conspiracy theory level stuff is not only a waste of my time but mostly a waste of your time. I suggest you move on with your life.
2. True, I challenged the person's bias considering extraordinary historical comments lacking extraordinary evidence.