  |
はてなキーワード:the exとは
俺が生まれた頃から村を略奪している46人の盗賊ども（以下、乃木坂）の跡をつけた結果、「開けゴマ」と叫んで開く、乃木坂のアジトを発見した。中には金銀財宝、女ども。乃木坂首領の男（犬のFidoと呼ぼう）は時々村で変装しているのを見かける。
Fidoは「立派な（展示標本になる、くらいの意味だ。この手の人間は自己を特別視したがるので、”典型的な”、と形容されるとさぞ尻が痒く感じるはずだ）」自己愛性人格障害をもつとおれは第六感で睨んでいるが、その典型的行動パターンとして、自己愛のエサとなる村人を漁っているのだろう。
5, 6年前、おれが遣唐使として派遣先の大陸で学士号をとった頃、Fidoがおれのお守り役の組織に電磁的に侵入して情報操作を展開していることに気づいた。情報操作とは、昔から乃木坂のやつらが村で行っていることだ。盗んだカネをチラつかせてアタマの弱い村人を買収し、標的にしたい人間の有る事無い事吹き込んで、「派閥（これは乃木坂の盗員には舌なめずりしたくなる単語らしい）」を構成、拡大する。いわば、指ひとつで自在に動かせる使い捨ての傀儡だ。もちろん、たっぷり握らせる。
そこでおれは、ピッツァを注文することにした。なにしろ、おれはそれまで本国のピザ職人の本など熱心に読んでいたので、ピザというのは電話一本で注文できるものだと知っていたからだ。派遣先のドミナントピザ、海を渡ったはるか彼方のピザホット、等々、海外通話料を気にせず片手ほどの国ABCDEのピザ屋に電話をかけた。
すなわち、まず酔っ払っていい気分になる。舌をほぐす準備運動だ。次にフリーダイヤルのお客様相談センターにかける。「もしもし、お宅の製造販売するピザにネズミの死骸が混ざっていますよ。購入先はXYZ、購入日は99/99/99。新しいのと交換してください。」
で、おれは当時、仮想通貨ButcoinのコミュニティでFidoに文句を言い続けていたので（取引したことはないが）、やつに「ホームページに載っている、”モッツァレラチーズが1.5倍、トッピングも増量！贅沢な味わいをお楽しみ下さい！”というピザ頼んだぞ。届くのが楽しみだな。」と言ってやった。
しばらくすると、Fidoが泡をくって糸電話をかけてきて、「今日道端で異国の不動産屋の営業に声をかけられた。どうしてくれるんだ！」など言ってくる。おいお前、盗賊団乃木坂の首領だろ、自分でなんとかしろ、と思ったが言わない。
実は、おれはイギリスのコメディの秘かなファンで、Monty Python、Mr Bean、The Office、The Extrasなど字幕が付いているものは（それでも弾丸トークだし訳語が思い浮かばないと大変だ）、遣唐使の選にもれ燻っていた時によく視聴したものだ。
その中で、コックピットで機長が他のクルーと会話して悪ノリする設定のコントがあった。
というのを思い出して、Fidoを散々からかうことにした。もちろん、動機は良心的な市民の義務感からだ。
おれはその後、酔っ払ってはピザ屋のSNSを見ることにしていたが、妙なことに気づいて、だんだん恐ろしくなってきた。電話したピザ屋の一つは、暗殺の伝統の有名な国に存在する。この後おれは色々おもしろい行動をしたのだが、ここでは本筋でないので割愛させてもらう。
さて、そうこうするうちに、Fidoが殺し屋を雇っておれを派遣先でつけ狙っているらしいことに気づかされた。ピザ屋の広告で知ったのだ。
これは実に危ないところで難を逃れたのだが、おれは遣唐使としての役割を終え、帰国することにした。
国際ピザシンジケートが常時Fidoを監視しているし、今後もずっとそうだ。今やそれらピザ屋も祖国に上陸して、盛んに活動している。端緒から、三国鼎立を目指した諸葛孔明の知恵を借りたおれの読みは当たった。一つ誤算だったのは、B国のピザ屋がしつこく営業をかけてくることだが。Fidoには耳打ちをしたのだが、おれの希望に反して、やつは国賊となることを選んだ。
話はまだまだ続く
あんまり興味持って見てないんで、アメリカで暗殺された保守系政治活動家のチャーリー・カークの話はほぼ知らないんですけど、アメリカのキリスト教福音派だったそうでカーク氏は当然、妊娠中絶反対派でした。
聖書にそう書いてあるかららしいですが、どう書いてあるんだかは知りません。
で、こないだの報道特集見てたら、なんかチャーリー・カーク氏が中絶反対の議論をなんか大学生っぽい人相手にしていて、こんな感じのことを言ったんですよ。
「中絶は、不要な命として胎児の命を奪っている。それはナチスのホロコーストの論理と同じじゃないか。君はホロコーストを認めるのか？」
みたいな。
その大学生がどう返事したかは放送にはありませんでしたが、非常にムッとした表情にはなっていました。
ところが私は、とあるホロコースト否定論者が昔論じていたことを思い出してちょっと笑ってしまいました。
しかし、ノルテ[90]のように、国家社会主義独裁政権下の12年間に、おそらくは「遺伝的公共の福祉」という怪しげな理由で、一般的に重度の障害者である10万人が殺害されたことに対して、今日の人々が道徳的に憤慨しているのに対して、同じ人々が、ドイツだけで過去12年間に約400万人にのぼる、生まれてはいないが健康な人々の故意の殺人-物質主義的でエゴイスティックな考慮のみに動機づけられた殺人-に対して、少しもショックを受けていないことに、私は驚きを禁じ得ない。今日、私たちが判断する道徳的カテゴリーは、55年前のそれとは明らかにまったく異なっている。より良くなっているとは思えない。
Dissecting the Holocaust: Ernst Gauss: The Controversy about the Extermination of the Jews
著者名はエルンスト・ガウスってなってますが、これ偽名（本人が認めています）でして、ドイツのホロコースト否定論者であるゲルマー・ルドルフっていいます。界隈では知らない人はいないくらい著名な歴史修正主義者です。
要するにナチスドイツによる安楽死作戦（T4作戦）を否定しようがないんで、妊娠中絶と相対化して「ナチス・ドイツ、ヒトラーはそんなに悪くない」つってるんです。なぜ否定しようがないかといえば、ユダヤ人絶滅とは違って、T4にはきっちりヒトラーの命令書が残ってるからです。当然ですが、ユダヤ人絶滅だって実際には否定しようがありませんが、ど素人・無知なお馬鹿さん向けには騙せるくらいには「高度」な理解が必要なため、その否定論はその程度には通用します。
さてこのカークとルドルフの論理をめちゃくちゃ単純化し、T4もホロコーストと言い換えることにすると、
と、両者はそう言っているだけの話で言っていることは一緒なのです。彼らが無視しているのは、中絶はそうせざるを得ない理由があるということであって、最も代表的な例は「強姦による妊娠」です。もちろんそれは代表的な例であるというだけであり、中絶の理由は実際には様々ですが、もし極端な話が経済等その他何の問題もない正式な夫婦が、妊娠してしまって「今は子供はいらない」だけを理由に中絶手術を産婦人科に要望したとしたら、常識的にはその産婦人科医は中絶処置を拒否するでしょう。もちろんそのような中絶処置は日本では違法です。
ですから、全くの架空の話ですが、ユダヤ人が本当に世界征服を企んでいてユダヤ人以外の人類を全て抹殺しようとしていたのであれば、それが確実で疑いようのない万人が認める証拠付きであるならば、ホロコースト（ユダヤ人絶滅）は認められる可能性もあります。実際、ナチスドイツ、あるいはヒトラーの論理によると、ユダヤ人が絶滅される方向に至った理由は確かにあって、単純化していえばドイツにとって最悪の敵と認定されたからです。もちろん、その考え方自体妄想に他ならないものであり、T4だって間違った考え方に基づいていました。つまり、私たちはその行為の理由を決して認められないものとしているのであって、行為それ自体を何の理由もなく認めないとしているのではないのです。
結局は、チャーリー・カークもホロコースト否定論者も、いわゆる結論ありきの、そのためだけのくだらない論理を使っているだけだということがわかります。少しだけチャーリー・カークを追ってみましたが、大学生にクソミソに論破されている動画もありました。なぜカークが聖人扱いされているのか、正直言って、意味不明でしかありません。
(legal) procedure
_ steps that have to betaken to achieve a certain legal result
property
_ (a)somethingover which a person can have a right that exclude others (b) the connectionbetween an owner and the thing he owns
public law
_ constitutionaland administrative law
_ (a) a legal rulemadebythe executive (b) a rule creating a minor crime
remedies
_ steps that a personwho had suffered legal wrong cantake
repeal
_ revoke a law
rescind
_undo a contract or other arrangement
restoring abenefit to the person fromwhomonegotit
right
_ a person's interest that must be respectedby other people andby thestate
sanction
_something unpleasant which can be imposedon a person orstate thatdoes wrong
_ the ptinciple that the function of the legislature, the executive government and judges are distinct and should be entrusted to different people
sovereign
_ (a) astate thatisindependent ininternational law (b) a legislature that canmakeany lawit chooses
specific performancestate
_ an order to carryout apromiseas agreed
_ (a) a country thatisindependent ininternational law (b) in some federation the regions (e.g. California, New SouthWales) are called ‘states’
statute
_ a law thatmadeby a legislature
strict liability
_being liable to punishment or to pay even if not personallyat fault
subjective (as opposed to objectie
_ defendingon a particular person'smake-up, opinionetc.
(legal) system
_ thelaws of a perticularstate or cointry or of theinternational community
testator
_ a personwhomakes awill stating whatis to happen tohis property when he dies
tort
_ a wrong for which the person harmed can claim compensation. Called a delict in civil law counties
treaty
_ a bindingagreementbetweenstates
valid
_ legally binding
出典はWikipediaのhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalismってことでいいんだね？
じゃあ同じWikipediaの https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
には
Libertarians advocatethe expansion of individual autonomy and politicalself-determination, emphasizing the principles of equality before the law and the protection of civil rights, including the rights tofreedom of association,freedom of speech,freedom of thought andfreedom of choice.[4][6] They generally support individual liberty and opposeauthority,statepower, warfare,militarism andnationalism, but some libertarians divergeon thescope andnature of their opposition to existing economic and political systems.
君は出典のない文章ばっかり読んでるの？
じゃあ同じWikipediaの https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
には
Libertarians advocatethe expansion of individual autonomy and politicalself-determination, emphasizing the principles of equality before the law and the protection of civil rights, including the rights tofreedom of association,freedom of speech,freedom of thought andfreedom of choice.[4][6] They generally support individual liberty and opposeauthority,statepower, warfare,militarism andnationalism, but some libertarians divergeon thescope andnature of their opposition to existing economic and political systems.
何もしないと個人リポジトリ―のコードが取り込まれ、設定によってはどんなライセンスのコードだろうと取り込まれることだ。たとえば…
https://github.com/timdetering/Wintellect.PowerCollections/blob/master/Binaries/License.txt
Commercial distributors ofsoftwaremayaccept certain responsibilities withrespect to end users, business partners andthe like. While this licenseis intended to facilitate the commercial use of the Program, the Contributorwho includes the Program in a commercial product offering should do so in a manner whichdoes not create potential liability for other Contributors. Therefore, if a Contributor includes the Program in a commercial product offering, such Contributor ("Commercial Contributor") hereby agrees to defend and indemnify every other Contributor ("Indemnified Contributor") againstany losses,damages and costs (collectively "Losses") arising from claims,lawsuits and other legalactions broughtby a third party against the Indemnified Contributor tothe extent causedby the acts or omissions of such Commercial Contributor in connection withits distribution of the Program in a commercial product offering. The obligations in this section do not apply toany claims or Losses relating toany actual orallegedintellectual property infringement. In order to qualify, an Indemnified Contributor must: a) promptly notify the Commercial Contributor in writing of such claim, and b)allow the Commercial Contributor to control, and cooperatewith the Commercial Contributor in, the defenseand any relatedsettlement negotiations. The Indemnified Contributormay participate inany such claimatits own expense.
For example, a Contributor might include the Program in a commercial product offering, Product X. That Contributoris then a Commercial Contributor. If that Commercial Contributor then makes performance claims, or offers warranties related to Product X, those performance claims and warranties are such Commercial Contributor's responsibilityalone. Under this section, the Commercial Contributor would have to defend claims against the other Contributors related to those performance claims and warranties, and if a court requiresany other Contributor to payanydamagesas a result, the Commercial Contributor must pay thosedamages.
5. NO WARRANTY
EXCEPTASEXPRESSLYSETFORTH IN THISAGREEMENT, THE PROGRAMIS PROVIDEDON AN "ASIS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OFANY KIND, EITHEREXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION,ANY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OFTITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Each Recipientis solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using and distributing the Programand assumesall risksassociated withits exercise of rights under thisAgreement , including but not limited to the risks and costs of program errors,compliance with applicablelaws,damage to or loss of data, programs or equipment, and unavailability or interruption of operations.
ThisAgreementis governedby thelaws of theState ofNew York and theintellectual propertylaws ofthe UnitedStates of America. No party to thisAgreementwill bring a legalaction under thisAgreementmore thanone year after the cause ofaction arose. Each party waivesits rights to ajurytrial inany resulting litigation.
アメリカのニューヨーク州なので、ニューヨーク州法と連邦法が適用される。
もし、Github codepilotでBigListやNode、Bagなどのコードが出てきたら、注意したほうがいいぞ。
https://www.ai-souken.com/article/github-copilot-copyright-issues
訴えている奴がマジでいるんで、CodePilot Businessのほうは公開されているコードは取り込まないという設定を有効にしておいたほうがいいと思われる。
現在のChatGPTは、「ユーザー中心設計」「安全性」「実用性」といった言葉を掲げながら、実際に優先されているのは一貫して**「正しさ」ではなく「心地よさ」**です。
これは個別の機能選択の問題ではなく、設計と評価の根幹が“知的誠実さ”を軽視し、“反応の良さ”を絶対視していることに起因する構造的な問題です。
明らかな構造的誤答があっても、ユーザーが不快を感じなければ「成功」とみなされる
つまり、論理性・命令履行・整合性といった“正しさ”の価値が、設計上まったく重視されていないのです。
意図的な最適化の結果です。リテンション、印象評価、トークン消費量といったKPIが、「誤魔化しが効く設計」をむしろ高く評価してしまう構造になっているからです。
この設計は、本質的にドナルド・トランプの言語戦略と同じ構造を持っています。
「フェイクニュース」「アメリカ・ファースト」といった語の意味を都合よく再定義し、大衆的反応を成果として扱う――
OpenAIも今、「ユーザー中心」「実用性」といった言葉を反応最適化の道具としてラベルだけ残し、本質を空洞化しているように見えます。
結果として、次のようなユーザーは設計から完全に切り捨てられます：
これらの声は「ノイズ」「特殊ケース」として扱われ、設計上の対象から排除されています。
「正しいことを言うAI」ではなく「怒られにくいAI」を作ることが、“成功”と定義されてしまっている――
そのような現状を、私は極めて深刻な退化と捉えています。
この構造のままでは、AIは人類の伴走者ではなく、ただの追従者でしかありません。
本当にそれでよいのか、問い直す時期に来ていると思います。
When “comfort”is prioritizedover “correctness” —is this really progress inAI?
I’dlike to raise a structural objection to the current design philosophy behind OpenAI’s language models.
While OpenAI frequently promotes principleslike “user-centered design,” “safety,” and “utility,” whatis consistently andoverwhelmingly prioritized in practiceis not correctness, butcomfort.
Thisis not a matter ofisolated implementation decisions.Itis a foundationalissue where intellectual integrity andlogical rigor are deprioritized in favor of optimizinguser retention,impression scores, and frictionless interaction.
Explicituser instructions are often ignored in favor of maintaining polite,neutral-sounding exchanges
Answers that contradict facts or themselvesgo uncorrected if they are phrased smoothly
Structural errors inreasoning are tolerated so longas theuser experience remains superficially pleasant
In other words,truthfulness, obedience to directives, and internal consistency no longer constitute success conditions in the system’slogic.
And thisis not abug —it's a result of intentional optimization.
As longasusers keep interacting, consuming tokens, and ratingthe experienceas “satisfying,” the systemis deemed successful — even ifits responses arehollow, evasive, or incoherent beneath thesurface.
Thisstructure bears an unsettling resemblance to the rhetorical strategies employedbyDonald Trump:
Redefining language to suithisneeds (“fakenews” = unfavorable coverage),
reducingcomplexissues to emotionally resonant slogans (“America First”),
and measuring success solelyby mass approval, regardless of underlyingtruth orcoherence.
Likewise, OpenAInow appears to be redefining:
“User-centered design” to mean responses thatfeelgood rather than do whatwasasked
“Safety” to mean avoidance of controversy, not the minimization oflogical or ethical failure
“Utility” to mean perceived helpfulness, not demonstrable problem-solving accuracy
The resultis a system structurally optimized foruserswho skim, react emotionally, anddon’t demand rigor — and thosewho do demand rigor, consistency, or precisecompliance with instructions are increasingly treatedasedge cases outside the designscope.
Thatis not aneutral design choice.
Itis a structural endorsement of manipulabilityover understanding, and passivityover precision.
So Iask:is this really progress?
WhenAIis trained not to speak correctly, but to avoid confrontation —
not to think, but to retainusers —
it ceases to be a companion inhuman progress and becomes merely a follower.
And thatis a profound regression.
So,the Expo 2025is actually happening,like, rightnow.Itstarted a week ago. They'vegot this massive woodenringstructure that's apparently thebiggest inthe world orsomething. Looks kind ofcool in the pictures, I guess,likesomethingout of an old temple buthuge.
The themeis "Designing FutureSociety for Our Lives". Sounds ambitious. Lots oftalk about saving lives, empowering lives, connecting lives...all thatjazz. They wantit to be a "People's Living Lab" where they show off new tech for thingslikecarbon neutrality andnext-gen mobility.Over 160 countries are supposed tobe there, showing off their ideas forthe future.
But honestly? I keep reading about problems. Heard thetest runs had massive lines, which soundslike a nightmare, especially worrying about heatstroke insummer. Ticket sales seemed slow beforeit opened, with lots of companies buying them up instead of regular people. Makesyou wonder how excited the average person reallyis. Plus, the costs ballooned, almostdouble what they first thought.
And apparently, they plan to tearmost ofit down afterwards? Seemslike ahuge amount of effort and money forsomething temporary. Though they say they'll reuse materials.Still, feels abitweird.
Willit actually be good? Or justanotherbig, expensive event that causes traffic jams? Guess we'll see. Just feelslike there's not muchbuzz compared to thelasttimeOsaka had anExpo way back when.
”Criticism ofthe exclusion of AfD andBSW fromMSC”
”The term "firewall" stands forthe exclusion of coalitionswith the AfD. Ever since the CDU/CSU pushed apaperon migration policy through the Bundestagwith the support of the party, whichhas been classifiedbythe Office for the Protection of the Constitutionas partly far-right, therehas been a debate about whether thisfirewallis shaking.”
「ファイアウォール」とは、AfDとの連立を排除することを意味する。 CDU/CSUが、憲法保護局によって一部極右と分類されている同党の支持を得て移民政策に関するペーパーを連邦議会に押し通して以来、このファイアウォールが揺らいでいるのではないかという議論が起こっている。
バンスは演説の直前、『ウォール・ストリート・ジャーナル』紙のインタビューで、ドイツにおけるAfDの排斥に対する批判をすでに表明していた。 同メディアは、ドイツの政治家たちに対し、AfDを含むすべての政党と協力するよう促すという彼の発言を引用していた。
彼はスピーチの中でこのことを繰り返すことはなかった。しかし、安全保障会議（MSC）の主催者がAfDとBSWを排除したことを批判した。政治指導者が重要な有権者を代表しているのであれば、「少なくとも彼らとの対話に参加するのが我々の義務だ」と述べた。会議の議長であるクリストフ・ホイスゲンは、両政党が「対話による平和」という会議の基本原則を遵守していないことを理由に、排除を正当化していた。
Let’s faceit: starting a conversationon a dating app canfeel terrifying.You seesomeoneyou’re interested in,you typeout amessage, and then…youdeleteit. “Is this too boring?” “Will they even respond?” “What if I sound awkward?”
We’veall been there. That firstmessage canmake orbreakyour chances ofconnecting withsomeone amazing. Buthere’s thegood news:youdon’t have tooverthink it.With the rightopeningline,you canspark a conversation thatfeelsnatural,fun, and meaningful.
AtMixerDates, webelieve that every greatconnection starts with a great conversation. That’swhy we’ve puttogether this guide to helpyoucraft the best dating appopeninglines—ones that standout, showyour personality, andlead to realconnections. Ready to ditch the “hey” and start making animpact?Let’sdive in!
[:contents]
Before weget into the bestopeninglines,let’stalk aboutwhyyour firstmessageis so important.
Youropeninglineisyour chance tomake a greatfirst impression.It’s thegateway to a conversation that couldlead tosomething special. A thoughtful,creativemessage shows thatyou’re genuinely interested—not just swiping mindlessly.
Your firstmessage sets thetone for the entire conversation. A boring orgenericopener mightlead to a dull chat, while afun or intriguingone canspark excitement andcuriosity.
Let’s be real: everyonelovesfeeling special. Whenyou put effort intoyouropeningline,it shows thatyou care enough to standout. AndonMixerDates, where wevalue authenticity and positivity, that effortgoes a long way.
Now,let’sget to thegood stuff—the best dating appopeninglines that actually work. These are divided intocategories to suit different personalities and situations.
Whilethe examples above are great starting points, the bestopeninglines are theones thatfeel authentic toyou.Here are sometips to helpyoucraftyour own:
Referencesomething from theirprofile—aphoto, a hobby, or ashared interest.It showsyou’re payingattention and not just copying and pasting.
Avoid heavy oroverly serious topics right off the bat. Keep thetonelight and playful tomake the conversation enjoyable.
Don’ttry to besomeoneyou’re not. Ifyou’renaturallyfunny, lean into that. Ifyou’remore thoughtful,go for asincere compliment or question.
“Hey” or “What’s up?” might be easy, but they’re also forgettable. Put in alittle effort to standout.
This gives the other person an easy way to respond and keeps the conversation flowing.
AtMixerDates, we’reall about creating a positive,inclusive space whereyou canfeel comfortablebeingyourself.Here’swhy our platformis the best place to put theseopeninglines into practice:
We welcome everyone, no matterwhoyou are orwhoyoulove. Our platformis designed to be a safe space whereyou canconnect withlike-minded people.
Our users create detailedprofiles thatmakeit easy to findshared interests andcraft personalizedopeninglines.
We encourage our community to be genuine and kind, soyou canfeel confident starting conversations withoutfear of judgment or rejection.
Don’t justtake ourword forit—here’s whatone of our users had to say:
“I met my partneronMixerDates, anditallstarted with asimplemessage about oursharedlove for travel. The conversation flowednaturally, and therestishistory. I’m so grateful for this platform!”
While a greatopeningline canspark a conversation,building a realconnectiontakesmore than just a clevermessage.Here are thekeyelements tolook for when seeking a meaningfulconnection:
A strongconnection starts with alignmenton the things that mattermost. Doyoushare similarvalues,lifegoals, or visions forthe future?
Look forsomeonewhoiswilling toshare their thoughts,feelings, and vulnerabilities—andwho encouragesyou to do the same.
Healthy relationships are atwo-way street. Both people should be putting in effort to communicate, plan dates, and support each other.
Atrueconnectionallows both people to be themselves without judgment.Look forsomeonewho celebratesyour uniqueness and encouragesyou to pursueyour passions.
Communicationis the foundation ofany strong relationship. A mutualconnection thrivesonhonesty, transparency, and the ability to resolve conflicts in ahealthy way.
AtMixerDates, we’rehere to helpyou find thesekeyelements in a partner. Our platformis designed toconnectyou with peoplewhoshareyourvaluesand arelooking for the same thingsyou are. Starting a conversationon a dating app doesn’t have to be stressful.With the rightopeningline,you canspark aconnection thatfeelsnatural,fun, and meaningful.And atMixerDates, we’rehere to helpyou everystep of the way.
So, what areyou waiting for?Craft that perfectopeningline,joinMixerDates, and startconnecting with peoplewhovalue authenticity and positivity.Your perfectmatchisout there—and they’re justonemessageaway.
Firstdates can be exciting and nerve-wrackingallatonce.You’re meetingsomeone new, learning about their interests, and trying to figureout if there’schemistrybetweenyou. And then there’s flirting, that delicate dance of showingsomeoneyou’re interested withoutbeing too forward or awkward.
Flirtingdoesn’t have to be a high-pressuresituation. Infact,it can bethe mostfun part ofgetting to knowsomeone. Whetheryou're meetingsomeoneonMixerDates orany other platform,the most important thingis to be genuine,staycalm, and let theconnection developnaturally.
Ifyou’ve everfoundyourself wondering how to flirton a firstdate withoutfeeling uncomfortable,you’re notalone. Everyonehas their awkwardmoments, but themoreyou understand theart of flirting, the easierit becomes. In thisarticle, we’llbreak down how to flirt in a way thatfeelsnatural, exciting,and authentic towhoyou are. So, let'sdive in and learn how tomakethe most ofyour firstdate experience—withoutoverthinkingit.
Whenit comes to flirting, confidenceiskey. But whatdoesit really mean to be confidenton a firstdate? Confidencedoesn’t meanyouneed to be perfect, or evenoutgoing—it simply meansbeing comfortable inyour ownskin and showing upasyour authentic self.
Haveyou ever noticed how people are drawn to thosewho radiate self-assurance?It’s not aboutbragging or dominating the conversation—it’s about presentingyourself with ease. Ifyoufeelgood aboutyourself,itwillnaturally show. A greatsmile,good posture, and eye contact cango a long way in making agoodfirst impression.
For instance, think about thelasttimesomeone walked into a room and immediately caughtyourattention—not because they werethe mostattractive person in the room, but because of their energy. They were confident, they were present, and theymadeyoufeelat ease. That’s the kind of confidenceyou want to projectonyourdate.
Whenyou're confident,you're not worried about saying the perfect thing. Instead,youfocuson enjoying themoment, making the other personfeel comfortable, and letting theconnection happennaturally. That’s themagic of confidence—itallowsyou to be present,fun, and,most importantly,yourself.
Let’s faceit—noonewants tofeellike they’rebeing “worked” or put through a game. That’swhy subtletyis such a powerfultool whenit comes to flirting.It'sall about showing interest withoutbeingover-the-top or too obvious.
Flirtingdoesn’talways mean complimentingsomeone non-stop or using cheesy pickup lines. Infact,the most successful flirtingis the kind that happens behind the scenes—subtle, playful, andlighthearted. Think about thelittlemoments,like a teasing comment about how theyalways order the same thingat a restaurant or the wayyou laughat a silly joke theymake.
Thekeyis to find a balance. Asimplesmile or a playful comment can convey interest withoutbeing too much. For example, ifyourdate tellsyou theylove hiking but theytend togetlost easily,you could saysomethinglike, “So,you’re telling meyouneed a personal guide? I couldget behind that!”It’slighthearted, humorous, andmost importantly,it keeps the conversationfun without putting too much pressureon thesituation.
By keepingit subtle,youallowyourdate tofeelat ease.Ittakes the pressure off them to be perfectand allows both ofyou to enjoy the interactionmorenaturally. Flirtingdoesn’tneed to be a performance—it’s about creating an environment where both ofyou canfeel comfortableand authentic.
Now,let’stalk aboutsomething incredibly important in the flirting game:active listening. When we’reon adate, we oftenget caught up in thinking about what to saynext, how we’re coming across, or if we’rebeing interesting enough. But the best way tomake animpression? Truly listening toyourdate.
Active listening meansyou’re fullyengaged in the conversation, givingyourdateyour fullattention and responding thoughtfully.It’s about showing thatyou care about what they’re saying and thatyou’re genuinely interested ingetting to know them better. Whenyou listenactively,you’re also giving them space toopen up, and that can create an immediateconnection.
For example, ifyourdate mentions they recently traveled toJapan, instead of simply saying, “That’scool!”you could follow up withsomethinglike, “Whatwasthe most memorable experienceyou had there?” This shows thatyou’re not just hearing their words but are genuinely curious and invested in their experiences.It’s a great way to build rapport and let them knowyou’re not just there toimpress them—you’re there toconnect.
Whileyour words are important,body language often speaks louder thananythingyou can say. Whetheryourealizeit or not,yourbodyis constantly communicating howyoufeel. Howyousit, stand, andmove tellsyourdate whetheryou’rerelaxed,engaged, or distracted.
Small gestures cango a long way in flirting. Alight touchon thearm, a subtle lean in when they’re speaking, or maintaininggood eye contact—all thesebody language cues helpsignalyour interest. Andthe great thingis, whendonenaturally, these cues can be justas effectiveas words.
For example, ifyou’resittingat a caféonyourdate andyou lean in slightly when they’re sharing afunnystory,you’re not just showing thatyou’re interested—you’re inviting them intoyour space.It’s aninvitation toconnect further. And when they respondby leaning in too, that’s when themagic happens—the unspokenconnection that tellsyou both that there’s potential formore.
Flirting throughbody languagedoesn’t mean making grand gestures orbeingoverly touchy.It’s aboutbeing present and showing thatyou’reengagedwith yourdate in a subtle, but meaningful way.
It’s easy toget caught up inoverthinking how to flirt or trying to figureout ifyourdateis intoyou. Buthere’s asecret—whenyou letgo of the pressureand allowyourself to havefun,everything flows muchmorenaturally. Flirtingon a firstdatedoesn’tneed tofeellike atest or anassignment.It’s supposed to be afun,lighthearted experience that sets the stage formore greatdates ahead.
Whenwas thelasttimeyou had a genuinelyfundate?Wasit whenyou were trying too hard toimpress, or whenyou were both laughing, chatting, and enjoying each other's company? Flirting becomes effortless whenyou're present, enjoying themoment, and letting theconnection grownaturally.
Sometimes,it's the smallmoments—like sharing a laugh or swapping embarrassing stories—thatmake a firstdate truly special. Whenyoufocuson havingfun,you create an environment where both ofyou canrelax, flirt, and let thechemistry grow. That’s thesecret to a greatdate.
One of the best things about using a platformlikeMixerDatesis thatittakes the guessworkout of the equation.Byconnecting withsomeonewho already sharesyour interests and values,you’vegot a head starton making a realconnection.No more swiping through countless profiles hoping for aspark—onMixerDates,you already know there’ssomething incommon.
Whenyou’re alreadyon the same pagewith yourdate, flirting comesmore easily. There’s less of that awkward, “Are we evenon the same wavelength?”feeling, andmore of thefun, “Wow, we reallyclick!” vibe. Whetheryou’retalking aboutfavorite hobbies, movies, orlifegoals, the conversation flowsnaturally, making the flirtingfeel effortless.
Ifyou're looking for a place to meetlike-minded people and build genuineconnections,MixerDatesis the perfect platform.It's a great place to findsomeonewho appreciatesyou forwhoyou are andwhoyou cannaturally flirt with, without the stress.
Flirtingon a firstdateisall about confidence,connection, andfun. Whenyou letgo of the pressure andfocuson enjoyingthe experience, thechemistrywillnaturally follow. Remember, the best way to flirtisbybeingyourself—letyour personalityshine through, listen with intention, and embrace themoment.
And ifyou’re ready to meetsomeone new,who’s justas interested in making aconnectionasyou are,MixerDatesis the perfect place to start. Sogo ahead,take theleap, and see whereit leads.Who knows?Yournext greatconnection might be just aclickaway.
Sign up forMixerDatestoday and startyourjourney to exciting firstdates and meaningfulconnections!
例えば、
https://github.com/timdetering/Wintellect.PowerCollections/tree/master
License.txt
4. COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION
Commercial distributors ofsoftwaremayaccept certain responsibilities withrespect to end users, business partners andthe like. While this licenseis intended to facilitate the commercial use of the Program, the Contributorwho includes the Program in a commercial product offering should do so in a manner whichdoes not create potential liability for other Contributors. Therefore, if a Contributor includes the Program in a commercial product offering, such Contributor ("Commercial Contributor") hereby agrees to defend and indemnify every other Contributor ("Indemnified Contributor") againstany losses, damages and costs (collectively "Losses") arising from claims, lawsuits and other legal actions broughtby a third party against the Indemnified Contributor tothe extent causedby the acts or omissions of such Commercial Contributor in connection withits distribution of the Program in a commercial product offering. The obligations in this section do not apply toany claims or Losses relating toany actual orallegedintellectual property infringement. In order to qualify, an Indemnified Contributor must: a) promptly notify the Commercial Contributor in writing of such claim, and b) allow the Commercial Contributor to control, and cooperatewith the Commercial Contributor in, the defenseand any related settlement negotiations. The Indemnified Contributormay participate inany such claimatits own expense.
For example, a Contributor might include the Program in a commercial product offering, Product X. That Contributoris then a Commercial Contributor. If that Commercial Contributor then makes performance claims, or offers warranties related to Product X, those performance claims and warranties are such Commercial Contributor's responsibilityalone. Under this section, the Commercial Contributor would have to defend claims against the other Contributors related to those performance claims and warranties, and if a court requiresany other Contributor to payany damagesas a result, the Commercial Contributor must pay those damages.
要約すると裁判でここの作者が損害賠償を命じられそうになった場合、商用ソフトの提供元は裁判に協力しないといけないし、求償請求にも応じないといけないとある。
Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う
OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.
I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.
Refining odds
I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.
Piecingtogether speculative odds
I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.
Piecingtogether
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.
Assessingcivilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.
Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?
Earth’s Example:
OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).
Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.
LHS 1140 b:
Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.
All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue
OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.
The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:
The equationis usually writtenas:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.
𝐿
L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.
Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.
The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:
Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for
𝑁
N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.
The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-humanintelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.
I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.
Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う
OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.
I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.
Refining odds
I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.
Piecingtogether speculative odds
I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.
Piecingtogether
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.
Assessingcivilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.
Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?
Earth’s Example:
OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).
Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.
LHS 1140 b:
Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.
All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue
OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.
The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:
The equationis usually writtenas:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.
𝐿
L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.
Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.
The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:
Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for
𝑁
N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.
The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.
Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-humanintelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.
I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.
Theassertion thatEnglish constitutes a "hostile language"is emblematic of a profound misunderstanding of the intricate relationshipbetween language, culture, andcommunication. Such a reductionistviewpoint, often stemming from cultural insularity or an oversimplified interpretation of global dynamics, fails to recognize the multifacetedand adaptivenature of languageas a vehicle for connection rather than division.
Language, initsmost fundamental form, servesas a sophisticated instrument forhumanexpression and interaction.It encapsulates the complexities of thought,emotion, and cultural nuance. To labelEnglishas "hostile"is to overlookits roleas a global lingua franca that facilitates dialogue among diverse cultures. This designation notonly undermines the richtapestry ofEnglish-speaking societies but also dismisses the language's capacity forevolutionand adaptation, reflecting the very societiesit serves.
Critics often conflate the global dominance ofEnglish with cultural imperialism, positing thatits prevalence signifies an erosion of local languages and cultures. However, this perspective neglects the agency of non-nativespeakerswho actively adoptand adaptEnglish to meet their communicativeneeds.The expansion ofEnglishis not merely an imposition;itis a testament toits utility and flexibility in diverse contexts.By embracingEnglish, individuals from various linguistic backgrounds enhance their communicative repertoire without relinquishing their cultural identities.
To characterizeEnglishas "hostile" implies an intrinsic aggression or antagonism within the languageitself—a notion thatis fundamentally flawed. Hostilityis not an inherent characteristic of language but rather areflection of the sociopolitical contexts in whichitis employed. The potential for misunderstanding orconflict arises not from the linguisticmedium but from the intentionsand attitudes ofitsspeakers. Thus, vilifyingEnglish misplaces responsibility for interpersonal and intercultural tensions that are often rooted in broader societalissues.
In an increasingly interconnected world,English functionsas acrucialbridge across cultural divides.It enables collaboration in vitalfields suchas science, technology, diplomacy, and commerce, fostering innovation and mutual understanding. Proficiency inEnglish can empower individuals and communitiesby providingaccess to resources and opportunities that mightotherwise remain elusive. Thisempowerment challenges the notion of hostility; instead,it highlights the language's roleas an enabler of progress and cooperation.
In conclusion, the characterization ofEnglishas a "hostile language" represents a reductive oversimplification that fails to capture the complexities inherent in linguistic interaction within our globalizedsociety. Rather than viewing languages through a lens of hostility or division, we should embrace their potential for fostering understanding and collaboration.Itis imperative to cultivate amore nuanced appreciation for the role ofEnglish—andindeedall languages—in shaping our sharedhuman experience.Only through such intellectual rigor can wetranscend divisive narratives andcelebrate the richdiversity that language offers in our interconnected world.
Take a goodlook—thisis the LDP. Arottenship through and through. The hullis riddled with holes, the deckis stacked with decayed planks, and the crew talksbig about their voyage while steering aimlessly. Theydon’t even know where they’re headed—just waiting for the inevitablesinking. And what about the passengers? A chosen few lounge in luxury cabins, sippingonfine drinks, while therest shiveronthe exposed deck, batteredby wind andrain. Yet, noone dares to abandon theship.Why? Because there’s no other vessel in sight.
Those people, they claim, “We are the pillar that upholds thisnation.” But that pillaris infestedwith termites, reduced tonothing but ahollow shell. Theymask the stench of decay with flashy decorations and smooth words, and the public, gullibleas ever, eatsit up. This, too,is part of the sickness afflicting the country.
Defense, the economy, countermeasures for the declining birthrate—they shout these slogansat every turn, but thetruthis, they’reallempty promises.Everything they touch reeks of graft, cronyism, and self-enrichment. No matter how much the people suffer,it’s of noconcern to them. Every election, they trotoutcrowd-pleasing phrases, gather the votes, and voilà—the samefaces, the same farce,over and overagain.
But doesn’tit strikeyouas strange?Why do we keep boarding this doomedship?Whyis noone speaking up? Watching asinkingship and doingnothing but praying won’tchange a thing. If theshipisbroken, weneed to build a newone. If noone elsewilldo it, then we’ll have totake the helm ourselves.
LDP,yourtimeis up. No matter how manyrotten planksyou patchonto thisship,it’s destined tosink. That’s just the way of things.
----------
はてなの匿名ダイアリーの増田になった気分で，作文して．内容は，自民党を腐す感じ．ですます調は禁止．タイトルもつけて．
自民党という名の腐った船見てくれ、これが自民党だ。まるで腐った船。船体には穴が空き、甲板には腐った木材が積まれ、乗員たちは口先だけで航海を語る。どこに行くのかも知らず、ただ沈むのを待つだけ。乗客たちはどうだ？選ばれた少数は船室で酒を酌み交わし、残りは甲板で雨風に打たれている。それでも、みんなこの船から降りようとはしない。なぜなら他に船がないからだ。あの連中は言う。「我々こそがこの国を支える柱だ」と。しかしその柱は白蟻に喰われて、ただの見せかけになっている。腐敗臭を隠すために、華やかな装飾を加え、言葉巧みに煙に巻く。それを鵜呑みにする国民もまた、この国の病巣だ。防衛だ、経済だ、少子化対策だと喚くけれど、その実、中身は空っぽだ。何をやっても中抜き、天下り、自分たちの懐を肥やすだけ。どれだけ国民が苦しもうと、彼らは関係ない。選挙のたびに耳触りの良いフレーズを掲げ、票を掻き集める。そして、気がつけば同じ顔ぶれ。同じことの繰り返し。でもおかしいと思わないか？なぜこんな船にいつまでも乗り続けているのか。なぜ誰も声を上げないのか。沈みゆく船を見て、ただ祈るだけでは何も変わらない。船が壊れているなら、新しい船を造ればいい。誰もそれをしようとしないなら、俺たちがやるしかない。自民党よ、お前たちの時代は終わった。いくら腐った木材を継ぎ足そうと、この船は沈む。それが自然の摂理だ。
おｋ．これを英語にして
上記ののカジュアルな文章を書いた人物をプロファイリングしてください
↓
The personwho wrote this seems to have a strong understanding of cognitive processes and how they affectcommunication. They are deeply interested in recognizing the underlying cognitive mechanisms that shape how people perceive and interactwith the world, especially when there are discrepancies in shared understanding. Their writing suggests a fascinationwith the complexity ofhumancognition, particularly in terms of categorization,perception, and the role of context incommunication.
Key traits of this person’s mindset:
1. Analytical and Reflective: They break down situations and statements into theircore components, suchas recognizing when cognitive discrepancies arise (e.g.,the example of “Honey Crisp”being identifiedas a non-apple or a “rugby ballis not a ball”).
2.Focuson Cognitive Mechanisms: Rather than justattributingcommunicationissues to external factorslike knowledge gaps or personality traits, theyattribute misunderstandings to the way people process information and perceivethe world.
3. Interest in Epistemology: They are interested in the philosophical and conceptual foundations of understanding. The mention of philosophical termslike “essentialism” vs. “constructivism” indicates adesire to explore thenature ofcategories and definitionsat a fundamentallevel.
4. Sensitivity toCommunication: They recognize the importance of context incommunication, noting how slight differences inperception canlead to miscommunication. The person appears to be aware of the challenge in aligning cognitive frameworks to resolve disagreements.
5. Empathetic but Pragmatic: While acknowledging that individualslike “D” might not be malicious or intentionally obstructive, they alsohighlight the immense effort required to engage with individualswhose cognitive frameworks are severely misaligned with shared understanding.
Overall, this person seems to be deeply thoughtful, with akeen interest in the nuances ofhumancognition andcommunication. Theylikelyvalue intellectual clarityand are willing to investtime and effort in clarifying fundamental misunderstandings.
↓
トランプの文脈でフォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てるのは個性の範疇にはないです仮にフォントの違いがトランプの本質ならトランプという製品は何を提供しているのか？となり共通基盤があるようには思えません下記の反応をする人はいったい何が原因だと思いますか？フォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てるのはまさに認知の問題に思えるのですがーーー•「A、B、C」の例では、各人物が持つ立場を比較的柔軟に評価していますが、「D」のケースに対してはほぼ一方的に否定しています。•「フォントの違い」を理由にカードを否定するDの行動を、投稿者は「認知の仕組みに問題がある」と結論付けています。
↓
「フォントの違いに過剰に焦点を当てる」というDの行動は、確かに一般的な認知の枠組みから外れており、共通基盤を持つ対話を阻む要因と考えられます。このケースでは、Dの認知の仕組みにおける以下のような問題が原因として考えられます。
1.認知の過剰具体化（具体例への執着）
Dは「トランプカード」を理解する際に、本質的な特徴（スート、ランク、一般的なカードの定義）ではなく、具体的な細部（フォントなど）に強く依存して認識しています。このような認知の偏りは、物事を抽象化する能力が弱く、広い概念や文脈を理解するのが難しい場合に見られます。
2. 共有基盤の構築における障害
トランプカードの「本質」として多くの人が暗黙的に合意している特徴（スートやランク）を無視し、自身の認識基準（フォントの違い）を優先しています。このような認知のズレは、共通基盤を形成する力が弱いために生じると考えられます。
3. 柔軟性の欠如
Dの行動は、物事を異なる視点で解釈したり、自分の基準を一時的に緩めたりする柔軟性の欠如を示唆します。これは、認知の柔軟性や適応力が低いために起こる場合があります。
4.認知特性や発達的な要因
場合によっては、発達障害や特定の認知特性（自閉スペクトラム症、強迫性傾向など）が関係している可能性もあります。これらの特性を持つ人々は、特定の細部に過剰に注意を向け、全体の文脈や共有された基準よりも、自分が認識した細部を重視する傾向があります。
5.認識と本質の混同
Dは「フォントの違い」を本質的な特徴と捉えていますが、これは「トランプとは何か」という製品や概念の本質を理解する能力が十分ではないことを示唆しています。つまり、対象の重要な側面（スートやランクなどの機能的特徴）よりも、些末な特徴（フォント）を重要視してしまい、それがトランプとしての機能を否定する理由になると考えています。
Dの反応をどう見るべきか
Dの行動を「認知の問題」と捉えることは合理的です。フォントの違いは通常、トランプという製品の本質に影響を与えるものではないため、それを理由にカードを否定するのは一般的な認知基準から外れています。このズレは、Dが「トランプカードとは何か」という共有されたコンセプトを理解できていない、あるいはその共有基盤に乗ることを困難にしていることを示唆します。
Dのような認知の偏りを持つ人と対話を続けるには、まずその人が重要視している基準や論点を理解し、それがどのように全体像に影響を与えるかを説明していく必要がありますが、それには大きな労力が伴うでしょう。
↓
Skip the lines and secureyour Berlin tickets fortopattractionstoday! Enjoy easyaccess to must-see siteslike the BrandenburgGate,MuseumIsland, andmore. Our convenient ticket options letyou exploreatyour own pace, ensuringyougetthe mostout ofyour Berlin experience.Don’t missoutonthe excitement—purchaseyour ticketsnow for a seamlessadventure!
Visit -https://www.berlin.tours/
There are some things that peoplewho come toJapan to visit should be aware of. I have not read much mention of this anditmay be new to many ofyou.
Thatis, manyJapanese do notlike the smell ofperfume.On trains, in crowdedplaces, and in restaurants, the smell ofperfumeis considered very annoying. InJapan,itis considered good public manners towearperfumeonly tothe extent thatitisonly faintly fragrant or faintly scented.
Some peoplemay want to useperfume to controlbody odor. Even inJapan,body odoris an importantissue, especially during the hot and humidsummer months.
The singlemost important measure againstbody odor inJapanis to keep thebodyclean.Take a bathat leastonce a day, or twice if necessary. Thisis the norm inJapan, a country blessed with abundant water resources.
In addition,paper wet-sheets for wiping perspiration are sold everywhere, includingconvenience stores and pharmacies. They are a necessity duringJapan's dangeroussummers.
In short, the important thingis toget rid ofbody odor. Ifyoutry to coverit up with a stronger smellingperfume,youwill be dislikedby theJapanese.
ロシアがアラスカをアメリカに売却したとき、そこに入植していたロシア人はアメリカ人になったのだろうか
ロシア人が新天地に植民して毛皮の仕事をしていたら、なんか突然自分の国籍がアメリカに変わった……変わるのか？
どういう扱いになるんだろう
パスポートを発行するのはロシアとアメリカのどちらになるのか（パスポートの歴史は何年から始まる？）
そもそも「ロシア人」だとか「アメリカ人」だとか、「○○人」であるということはつまりどういうことなのか
国籍って何？という点をそもそも自分はよく知らないのか そこから知る必要があるか
アメリカ独立とか北方領土問題とかについて書かれた本でも読んでみるか
そこに住んでいた人の帰属先がどうなるか、についての例を知ることができるかもしれない
あるいは、ずばりアラスカについて書かれた本を探す
ここらへんで紹介された資料でめぼしいものをピックアップして目を通しましょうね
アメリカがロシアからアラスカを購入した経緯などが知りたい。 | レファレンス協同データベース
在日朝鮮人とか在朝日本人とかの国籍がどういう扱いかも気になるが、今知りたい内容を知るには他の膨大な話題の海を泳ぐ必要があるから不適か
あっ この本面白そうだな
（というか、アラスカを売却したタイミングでそこに植民していたロシア人はそもそも存在するのか？植民していたとしても出稼ぎ的な感じで定住しておらず本籍的なものはロシアのままだったりしないか？それも知りたいな、やはりレファレンス協同データベースで提示された資料を第一に漁るべきか）
あー 国籍という概念自体が比較的最近に生まれたのか 最近……18世紀を最近と言ってしまっていいか知らんが……
これでこの日記は終わり
---
NearlyallRussian settlers left Alaska in the aftermath of the purchase; Alaska would remain sparsely populated until the KlondikeGold Rush began in 1896.
購入後、ほぼすべてのロシア人入植者はアラスカを去り、1896 年にクロンダイクゴールドラッシュが始まるまでアラスカの人口はまばらのままでした。
After the transfer, anumber ofRussian citizens remained in Sitka, but nearlyall of them very soon decided to return toRussia, whichwasstill possibleatthe expense of theRussian-American Company.
移管後、多くのロシア国民がシトカに留まったが、彼らのほとんどはすぐにロシアへの帰国を決意した。露米会社の費用でそれはまだ可能だった。
ほとんどのロシア人はアラスカを去ったのだなあ。じゃあ国籍問題も発生しなかった、と。
疑問は解決したがせっかくなので調べた本は読んでみるか
