conuly: (Default)
[personal profile] conuly
Nobody likes him, everybody hates him. Don't you just want to send him a bag of gummy worms?

Sooooo, everybody and their dog has their own pet armchair diagnosis of Donald Trump. "Dementia" is popular among the subset of the population that hasn't heard of narcissism, although a cursory examination of the evidence shows he's been like this a long time.

Here, somewhat randomly, are two Siris talking to each other. They seem convincingly human, right up until the point where they don't, not even a little.

And here is an article I read a few months ago about Trump. I probably posted it then, but I finally figured out what wigged me out about it. Check out the quote:

“OK,” I say. “You’re basically alone. Your wife is still asleep” – he was then married, but not for much longer, to his second wife, Marla Maples – “you’re in the bathroom shaving and you see yourself in the mirror. What are you thinking?”

From Trump, a look of incomprehension.

Me: “I mean, are you looking at yourself and thinking, ‘Wow. I’m Donald Trump’?”

Trump remains puzzled.

Me: “OK, I guess I’m asking, do you consider yourself ideal company?”

(At the time, I deemed Trump’s reply unprintable. But that was then.)

Trump: “You really want to know what I consider ideal company?”

Me: “Yes.”

Trump: “A total piece of ass.”

Trump is asked an existential question which he doesn't understand and can't answer. And so, groping for something to say, he resorts to a smutty comment.

This is not how humans speak. This is what you get from chatbots. We have a *shudder* president now who could not reliably pass a Turing test.

And when you look at it in this light, it all makes sense. The bizarre fixations. The fragmented sentences. The obsessive tweeting.

Armchair diagnosis completed: Donald Trump is nothing more than a poorly designed android whose grasp of humans barely makes it out of the chatbot stage. It's sad, really. It's like that Moriarty episode of TNG, except their AI is more I.

Date: 2017-01-25 07:17 am (UTC)
st_aurafina: Rainbow DNA (Default)
From: [personal profile] st_aurafina
We have a *shudder* president now who could not reliably pass a Turing test.

Omg, my skin is actually crawling. That's... parakeets are smarter than that.

this is a digression about interviewing, I think

Date: 2017-01-25 12:47 pm (UTC)
redbird: closeup of me drinking tea (Default)
From: [personal profile] redbird
Once the interviewer gets to what they're asking for, his answer is as weird and problematic as you say. But if you asked me "your spouse is still asleep, you're in the bathroom shaving and you see yourself in the mirror. What are you thinking?" the first, honest answer would probably be something like "did I get all the hairs on my chin this time?" or "should I wash my hair this morning?" Maybe something about the plans for the rest of the day or longer. Not, "Wow, I'm [personal profile] redbird."

"Do you consider yourself ideal company?" is a whole different question, or two questions. Ideal company for myself, sometimes; ideal company for other people, depends on which other people and when. There are lots of perfectly fine people I wouldn't be great company for, because their hobbies, interests, even obsessions don't overlap with mine. We could get along for an hour, sure, but we'd both have a more interesting afternoon with other people, sometimes even the same other people, the Venn diagrams of what people enjoy and care about being like that.
redbird: closeup of me drinking tea (Default)
From: [personal profile] redbird
Good point. I have never been in any sort of position where I get interviewed by the press, let alone with that sort of question about myself (rather than about a specific project or event), but in that context I'd expect the person being interviewed to say something like "probably I'm thinking about my plans for the day" and wait for the interviewer to at least hint at what they're looking for.
marahmarie: my initials (MM) (Default)
From: [personal profile] marahmarie
Also, there is a NYism wherein when someone asks you a serious question and you know it's a serious question, but either a) you don't understand it or b) you don't want to risk the levity or good feeling of the moment with a serious answer, so you give a blow-off, could-be-interpreted-truth-or-as-kind-of-kidding answer. (Howard Stern show if I have the quote correct; this show takes place in the heart of NYC, Trump is a frequent guest, and both are invertebrate NYers).

So I'd tend to combine that setting and these two particular people with Trump's innate vacuousness, which is already apparent pretty much 24/7, and say he just blew off this question in a deliberately, to his mind, "entertaining" manner as the easiest option, because conventionally NYers tend to do that, anyhow.
Edited (clarity) Date: 2017-01-28 01:28 pm (UTC)
marahmarie: my initials (MM) (Default)
From: [personal profile] marahmarie
Answer: It's both. I caught it before posting, figured it was some sort of an error, then pretty much went, "Wait, but that works, too"!
Edited (according to Google, the actual word my caffeine-deprived brain is seen struggling for was "inveterate") Date: 2017-01-28 08:11 pm (UTC)


conuly: (Default)

October 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 17th, 2017 07:32 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios