Nothing Funnier To Me Than When AI Does Math Wrong. Like I Get Why It Happens, It's A Language Model

A lot clicked for me when my mom said the reason she was so reactive towards me as a kid was that she assumed intent behind things I did, rather than recognizing my behaviors for being normal kid behaviors or normal autism behaviors. So I got treated as if I was an adult who was intentionally doing things to upset her. She'd react to me like I had the maturity and wherewithal to do things in a cruel or manipulative way, making her life harder, when I was just existing. Just trying to learn how to cope and be a person myself. When she told me this I stopped in my tracks trying to process. Why would anyone's default assumption be that a kid is trying to antagonize them instead of like, struggling with something they're experiencing? But she was also raised the exact same way, treated like everything she did carried the weight of adult responsibility, not seen as a kid.

happy autism awareness day to all the girls who had “ friends” growing up who were actually bullying them . to the girls who always sat alone in the grass and wondered why nobody wanted to talk . to the girls who spoke to animals like they were listening . to the girls who created a little world in their room . to the girls who always felt ashamed for how deeply they love things and how passionately they enjoyed media . to the girls who covered their ears when they were overwhelmed by everything . to the girls who carrying a special thing around to feel safe . to the girls who never understood what they did wrong to feel so lonely . to the girls who were diagnosed later in life because they weren’t little boys who liked trains. you are so special and beautiful and you’re not worse for it, you love deeply and that is so wonderful please never try to push that down . I LOVE YOU !!!!!

Sometimes I just kinda wanna cry because in the MCU, Steven Grant Rogers:

Was violently bullied throughout his childhood and into adulthood.

Watched his mother waste away and die.

Was an orphan by his mid-to-late teens.

Grew up in poverty, during the Great Depression, as the child of immigrants .

Grew up color-blind, partially-deaf, malnourished/stunted, and chronically-ill, in a culture that was so big on eugenics that Nazis took their cues from the US systems.

Signed up for the army and then dove on what he believed to be a live grenade because he believed the best use of his life was to exchange it for the lives of others.

Fought on the front lines of the bloodiest and most horrific war in human history, where he undoubtedly witnessed terrible violence and atrocities.

Watched his best friend die and lived with the guilt of believing he was responsible.

Crashed a plane into the ocean, fully believing he was going to die.

Was frozen alive.

Woke up to find that nearly everyone he’d ever known was dead and gone, and his home was changed nearly beyond recognition; he could never truly go home from the war. Ever.

Lost his shot at happiness with the one woman who ever actually looked at him when he was small and frail, and had to watch her mind come apart, and later carry her coffin.

Found out his sacrifice – the thing he gave up his life, his friends, his whole world for – was in vain, and that HYDRA had corrupted the legacy of the people he loved.

Found out his best friend survived, and that he’d abandoned him to a fate worse than death, and got to then live with THAT fresh guilt.

Is seen by most people as Captain America; almost no one sees Steve Rogers.

Was only 26 years old, biologically, during the Battle of New York. 

Has not had the time or resources to cope with any of this.

I found this hilarious post stating elons girlfriends as typical c drama concubines and I'm loosing it

Bonus

I really think everyone needs to truly internalize this:

Fictional characters are objects.

They are not people. You cannot "objectify" them, because they have no personhood to be deprived of. They have no humanity to be erased. You cannot "disrespect" them, because they are not real.

Dean Winchester is the open wound in the body that is Supernatural. He is an infection that spreads until it poisons everything around him, no matter if It's a person or a plotline.

At first, he was just annoying and borderline abusive, something that could be explained by his upbringing, that could’ve been explored. There was potential for him to grow, to evolve beyond the toxic traits he inherited from John, to show that people can get better, that your upbringing didn't define you and for a bit, it seemed like he might. But as soon as he showed signs of becoming better, he ripped off the scab of progress and let the wound fester instead. Season after season, rather than improving, he got worse, getting more selfish, hypocritical, and abusive. Instead of healing, he became the rot at the show’s core.

The infection spread beyond just his character however, it consumed the entire narrative. Everything began to revolve around what Dean wanted, how Dean felt, and what Dean needed. The other characters stopped being people with their own agency and instead became tools, existing to serve and cater to his every whim. The story bent itself around him, sacrificing logic, depth, and complexity in favor of ensuring that Dean never had to face real consequences. It ruined the show’s potential. Instead of telling a story about how a bond like Sam and Dean’s (or even Dean’s relationships with Cas, Charlie, etc.) could help someone grow into a better person, they doubled down on Dean’s worst tendencies. Instead of evolving, he dragged everyone else down with him.

One example of how Dean’s toxicity didn’t just warp the narrative but completely destroyed a character is Castiel. Castiel represented something meaningful at the start: the idea that humanity, despite all its flaws, was still worth fighting for and that people can change and form their own opinions even though they've been controlled and manipulated before. He was proof that even among corruption and destruction, there was goodness that made it all worthwhile, that people can forge their own path if they believe in something and act upon said belief.

But, once the writers started throwing rotting breadcrumbs at the Destiel shippers, they stripped Castiel of his character and made everything about Dean. Instead of being a character with his own beliefs, struggles, and development, he was reduced to nothing more than an extension of Dean, an accessory whose only purpose was to suffer for him. And what did Dean do in return? Nothing good. He never treated Castiel as an equal. He constantly belittled and ridiculed him, acting as though Castiel’s sacrifices were either expected or irrelevant.

Castiel went from breaking free of heaven’s control, from questioning blind obedience and learning to think for himself, to willingly throwing himself into another toxic, one-sided dynamic where his needs and wants didn’t matter. He lost everything, his family, his power, his home, his life, and for what? Are we supposed to find it meaningful that Castiel’s entire existence was reduced to a last-minute, half-baked confession that Dean didn’t even acknowledge? That his death scene was brushed aside with no real grief, no impact, no weight? He deserved better than that but the writers decided it would be a good idea to have Castiel’s story amount to nothing. In the end, he was nothing but a footnote in Dean’s narrative, something that mattered for a few minutes before it lost its relevance.

But if Castiel was collateral damage in Dean’s story, Sam was the biggest victim.

From the very beginning, Sam had potential, potential for something beyond hunting, beyond the endless cycle of death and violence that consumed their lives. He had dreams, ambitions, and a future that should have been his. And every step of the way, Dean was there to tear him down. Long before the show even started, Dean was already keeping Sam small, making sure he never realized that he deserved more than a life of blood and misery. Dean wanted Sam trapped in hunting, dependent on him, tied to him forever and that pattern never changed.

He is obsessive and possessive, acting less like a brother and more like an overbearing owner who refuses to let Sam have any independence. The second Sam does anything without telling him, whether it's texting someone, making his own choices, or simply not answering a call, Dean immediately acts like Sam just opened Pandora's Box. He treats Sam’s autonomy as a threat, as if the moment he isn't constantly under surveillance, the world will fall apart.

But he's not just abusive he's also incapable of accepting his mistakes considering that Dean becomes aggressive and defensive as soon as they get brought up. Examples include breaking the first seal which was 'understandable because he got tortured', tricking Sam into getting possessed which was 'something he needed to do because he didn't want Sam to die' (no matter how much Sam wanted to), and locking Sam in the panic room to die because he'd "at least die human". Still, he never hesitates to throw Sam’s mistakes back in his face. Sam is never allowed to forget drinking demon blood, never allowed to forget trusting Ruby, even though she preyed on his vulnerability and caused his addiction to manipulate him. Dean also holds him responsible for being Lucifer’s vessel, even though that was quite literally decided by God. And yet, when Dean makes mistakes suddenly it’s not his fault, and everyone just needs to move on because they all made mistakes (especially Sam, apparently).

But Dean’s hypocrisy doesn’t stop there, oh no. Because when Sam was blamed for "freeing Lucifer," by mistake he alone was expected to fix it, but when Castiel knowingly freed Lucifer suddenly all of them needed to take care of it. The double standard is obvious and tells us the following: Dean plays favorites when it suits him, and when it doesn’t, he shifts the blame onto whoever is most convenient which more often than not, means Sam is getting blamed.

And yet, despite treating Sam like a scapegoat, he also treats him like a trophy, a possession, something he has complete control over. He needs to know where Sam is, who he's talking to, and what he's doing or he'll pretend like the world is ending.

But he doesn’t just control Sam, he's not just hypocritical and abusive, he also sabotages his storylines at every turn. I'm saying that because every time Sam had an interesting plotline, something that could have made the show richer and more compelling, something that could've made Sam stronger, Dean was there to ruin it.

Sam's demon blood arc? Reduced to a mistake Dean never let him forget about, rather than the complex story about addiction and manipulation that it could have been. Not to mention the fact that even before Ruby used Sam's grief to get him addicted Dean judged Sam for having the blood inside him in the first place; as if it was his fault Mary made that deal, as if Sam could have stopped yellow eyes as an infant.

Sam as the Boy King of Hell? Dropped without explanation and never picked up again (until years later for one minute that is). I personally think they dropped that particular arc because Dean would have been insufferable towards Sam during it which they couldn't do considering 'Dean is such a cool guy'. It was the same with Sam being psychic: Dean would never accept the fact his brother wasn't what he wanted him to be so the plotline was scrapped.

Sam's hell trauma? No need to explore it or show the lasting effects because Dean would be sad if Sam wasn't perfectly fine after his mangled soul got forced back into his body (by Dean, mind you).

Sam being suicidal? Why explore that if you can do other, more interesting things with Dean instead?

Even Sam’s relationship with Jack was downplayed. The parallels between Sam and Jack alone make it obvious that the relationship between the two of them should have been the focus of Jack’s introductory season. Sam, who spent his life struggling under the weight of what he was supposed to be, who was told time and time again that he was dangerous, that his powers made him evil, was the perfect person to guide Jack through the same struggles. But that wasn’t explored. The fact that Sam was raising the child of the man who abused and controlled him, the child of the being that essentially destroyed Sam's life and psyche even though he was probably scared to death every time he saw Jack wasn't explored either.

Jack’s entire story should have revolved around his relationship with Sam, the person who treated him with kindness, and who tried to help him even though his father was, like I said, the being who abused him for centuries. Their relationship should have been so much more but it wasn’t and why?

Because they needed to shove Dean into Jack’s story instead. Even though Sam was the one who treated him with kindness, who defended him, and who saw him as more than just a weapon, the writers made sure to include forced bonding scenes between Dean and Jack so that they could pretend Dean had always been the father figure. I'm sure they did that so Destihellers and the writers could pretend Cas and Dean were Jack's parents even though everyone who watched the show should know that isn't true no matter how much certain people might want it to be.

Alone the fact that Dean threatened to kill Jack should make that obvious.

The sad thing about all of this is that Sam was supposed to be the main character but when fans decided Dean was cooler, the writers catered to them instead of telling a story about the person that's objectively more interesting.

So in conclusion, Dean Winchester wasn’t just a toxic character; he was an infection that spread through the entire show, warping the story, ruining the characters, and dragging Supernatural down with him. Every plotline, every relationship, every moment of potential was sacrificed so that he could remain the center of attention. The show could have been so much more, but instead, it chose to revolve around the worst thing in it: Dean.

(I will make separate posts about Sam and Castiel as well)

Side note: I wrote this at 3 a.m. because I couldn't sleep and saw people waxing poetry about Dean on Twitter.

I don't know how people came to think that "the banality of evil" means "evil people are people too".

That's also true but it's not what the banality of evil means.

The term was coined by Hannah Arendt in her report on the trial of Adolf Eichmann, the architect of the "final solution" in the Holocaust.

It describes the way in which the Nazis at large and Eichmann in particular have turned the horrendous act of mass murder into just another job, disconnecting themselves morally and emotionally from their actions.

Before the death camps and gas chambers, Nazi soldiers simply shot Jews into mass graves by the hundreds of thousands. It was a lot cheaper and faster, but it caused great psychological distress for the murderers who pulled the trigger.

The leadership's solution was a massively upscaled version of the "gas vans" they used to mass murder hundreds of thousands of Germans with disabilities and mental health issues.

Shooting bound civilians in point blank range over and over is something you can't just pretend you're not doing or is no big deal. But if you're just the guy who sorts people into groups. Or just the guy that funnels them into a room. Or just the guy who opens a cannister on the roof. It's much easier to distance yourself from what you know is happening.

The same principle applies to much lesser evils, like soldiers operating drones from a distance, or insurance workers denying coverage for life-saving treatment.

"why didn't lan wangji help wei wuxian during wei wuxian's first life? why didn't lan wangji use his own righteous reputation to help clear wei wuxian's name? why didn't lan wangji try to tell the world that wei wuxian wasn't raising a wen army?"

well.....

Destroy the myth that libraries are no longer relevant. If you use your library, please reblog.