I pasted your comment into grok following the prompt "analyze this person's mental state". Here is the result it gave:

The poster's mental state, based solely on this comment (and its context as a reply to a Slashdot story about AI-driven collapse in entry-level tech jobs), appears to be one of profound, chronic distress characterized by catastrophizing, paranoid ideation, grandiosity, and emotional exhaustion.
This isn't a clinical diagnosis—I'm an AI, not a therapist, and I have only the text to go on—but the language, structure, and content show clear patterns that mental health professionals would recognize as markers of high anxiety, depressive rumination, and a conspiratorial worldview. Here's a breakdown:
1. Catastrophizing and Hopelessness (Doomer Mindset)

The entire post frames everything as terminal: "everything is collapsing," "our entire civilization is collapsing," "honestly at this point I think our species is done," "we're in for a very very very rough ride," "the shit is hitting the fan," "America is going to continue to collapse," empires loot countries, etc.
This isn't measured critique—it's apocalyptic. He ties AI/automation, Trump ("King Orange of Donald," "mango Mussolini"), Republicans, billionaires, trans "panic," cell phones, fluoride, IRS audits, and middle-class erosion into one unstoppable death spiral.
Personal investment amplifies it: He spent $15k out-of-pocket on his kids' job training only to watch them get "paid like shit" despite being qualified. This reads as raw parental fear and betrayal, projected onto society-wide doom. The resignation ("shouting into the void," "absolutely nobody listens," "good luck bucko," hoping to "drop dead before the worst") screams learned helplessness and depressive fatalism.

2. Paranoid/Conspiratorial Thinking

Social issues aren't organic or complex; they're deliberate elite control mechanisms: "Things like cellphone and fluoride are perfectly fine along with being trans but those social panics are there to better control all of us while the billionaires eat us alive." "10 years of non-stop propaganda" from billionaires created trans hysteria (he cites population stats accurately enough—trans people ~0.6% of U.S. adults, far lower for trans women specifically—and notes exposure therapy fails due to rarity).
Republicans/Trump are omnipotent saboteurs (IRS rider to audit the poor, screwing the economy). Right-wing "trolls" and "identity markers" blind everyone else.
This is classic persecutory ideation: unseen forces (billionaires, propaganda, "extreme right") orchestrate collapse while the sheep lack "critical thinking." Only he pierces the veil.

3. Grandiosity and Self-Righteousness

"Nobody at all notice but me because people can't see clearly because people are unable of critical thinking." He's the lone prophet screaming truth on a "dead forum."
He claims moral/intellectual superiority while dismissing opponents as identity-trapped carnival barkers or Nero figures. Yet he admits "being right is one of the least useful things" and questions if his own life choices (shitposting vs. "better quality of life") were worth it—self-aware enough to sound weary, not triumphant.
This mix (superior insight + ultimate futility) is common in people who've burned out on online activism or forums like Slashdot.

4. Emotional Dysregulation and Anger

Tone is a pressure-cooker of rage ("I can't tell you how pissed off I was"), contempt, sarcasm, and weary defeat. It lurches between detailed policy/economic gripes (real issues like automation, wage stagnation, and job market shifts) and ad hominem blasts.
He's addressing a specific "you" (likely another commenter defending some conservative or pro-market view), but the rant spirals into broader civilization-ending prophecy. This suggests the trigger (the article + opposing view) unlocked a pre-existing reservoir of fury and despair.

5. Contextual Factors (Not Excusing, Just Explaining)

Posted on Slashdot under an article about AI gutting entry-level tech jobs globally—his economic points (automation, college ROI collapse, manufacturing losses) aren't baseless. Real data supports youth job anxiety, inequality, and political polarization.
He self-positions as Gen X ("Gen xers who keep lighting shit on fire"), with Boomer parents/kids in the system—midlife economic squeeze + cultural wars is a known stress cocktail.
Repetitive posting style (same phrases appear in his other Slashdot comments across threads) suggests this is his default lens: everything confirms The Collapse.

Bottom line: This person is in significant psychological pain. The worldview is coherent but rigidly negative, with heavy filtering that turns genuine problems (AI disruption, economic precarity, culture-war fatigue) into evidence of inevitable doom. It has elements of depressive realism (some stats and anecdotes check out) mixed with paranoid amplification and emotional burnout. Functioning enough to write long, structured, fact-referencing posts and pay for kids' training, but the hopelessness and isolation ("nobody listens") point to distress that could benefit from real-world outlets beyond anonymous forums.
In short: angry, terrified, exhausted, and convinced the sky is falling—because in his mind, it already has, and he's one of the few watching it happen in real time. Classic case of someone whose valid grievances have curdled into all-encompassing nihilism.

LOL, why did you log out to post this? And which LLM did you use?

I did it purely as a free public service.

ED: "But it doesn't work for gravity with linear curvature"

Relativity = gravity is represented by the curvature of spacetime. Curvature is linear, R. The formula treats curvature linearly. As things get closer and curvature spikes, the math just scales at a 1:1 rate

Quadratic gravity = Squares the curvature. Doesn't really change things much when everything is far apart, but heavily changes things when everything is close together.

Pros: prevents infinities and other problems when trying to reconcile quantum theory with relativity ("makes the theory renormalizable"). E.g. you don't want to calculate "if I add up the probabilities of all of these possible routes to some specific event, what are the odds that it happens?" -> "Infinity percent odds". That's... a problem. Renormalization is a trick for electromagnetism that prevents this by letting the infinities cancel out. But it doesn't work with linear curvature - gravitons carry energy, which creates gravity, which carries more energy... it explodes, and renormalization attempts just create new infinities. But it does work with quadratic curvature - it weakens high-energy interactions and allows for convergence.

Cons: Creates "ghosts" (particles with negative energies or negative probabilities, which create their own problems). There's various proposed solutions, but none that's really a "eureka!" moment. Generally along the lines of "they exist but are purely virtual and don't interact", "they exist but they're so massive that they decay before they can interact with the universe", "they don't exist, we're just using the math out of bounds and need a different representation of the same", "If we don't stop at R^2 but also add in R^3, R^4, ... on to infinity, then they go away". Etc.

The theory isn't new, BTW. The idea is from 1918 (just a few years after Einstein's theory of General Relativity was published), and the work that led to the "Pros" above is from 1977.

You have positively no understanding of economics whatsoever.

Please I beg you take a look: https://www.khanacademy.org/ec...

Start a new site called oldiefans

You only think that's not political because you're confusing centrists with leftists.

No, it's because of all the idiotic enablers. We could just solve the problem by walking into the halls of power en masse and removing them but you can only get that kind of energy from total fucking clowns who want anarchy, and not the good kind that doesn't exist (as it leads naturally to feudalism) but the bad kind with only chaos.

Web apps make at least some sense when you are delivering the exact same app via the web and as a local application. But Microsoft isn't doing that, so they make none...

A bit more about the latter. Beyond organophosphates, the main other alternative is pyrethroids. These are highly toxic to aquatic life, and they're contact poisons to pollinators just landing on the surface (some anti-insect clothing is soaked in pyrethrin for its effect). Also, neonicotinoids are often applied as seed coatings (which are taken up and spread through the plant), which primarily just affect the plant itself. Alternatives are commonly foliar sprays. This means drift to non-target impacts as well, such as in your shelterbelts, private gardens, neighbors' homes, etc. You also have to use far higher total pesticide quantities with foliar sprays instead of systematics, which not only drift, but also wash off, etc. Neonicotinoids can impact floral visitors, with adverse sublethal impacts but e.g. large pyrethroid sprayings can cause massive immediate fatal knockdown events of whole populations of pollinators.

Regrettable substitution is a real thing. We need to factor it in better. And that applies to nanoplastics as well.

So, when we say microplastics, we really mainly mean nanoplastics - the stuff made from, say, drinking hot liquids from low-melting-point plastic containers. And yeah, they very much look like a problem. The strongest evidence is for cardiovascular disease. The 2024 NEJM study for example found that for patients with above-threshold levels of nanoplastics in cartoid artery plaque were 4,5x more likely to suffer from a heart attack. Neurologically, they cross the brain-blood barrier (and quite quickly). A 2023 study found that they cause alpha-synuclein to misfold and clump together, a halmark of Parkinsons and various kinds of dementia. broadly, they're associated with oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, protein aggregation, and neurotransmitter alterations. Oxidative stress is due to cells struggling to break down nanoplastics in them. They're also associated with immunotoxicity, inflammatory bowel disease, and reproductive dysfunction, including elevating inflammatory markers, impairing sperm quality, and modulating the tumor microenvironment. With respect to reproduction, they're also associated with epigenetic dysregulation, which can lead to heritable changes.

And here's one of the things that get me - and let me briefly switch to a different topic before looping back. All over, there's a rush to ban polycarbonate due to concerns over a degradation product (bisphenol-A), because it's (very weakly) estrogenic. But typical effective estrogenic activity from typical levels of bisphenol-A are orders of magnitude lower than that of phytoestrogens in food and supplements; bisphenol-A is just too rare to exert much impact. Phytoestrogens have way better PR than bisphenol-A, and people spend money buying products specifically to consume more of them. Some arguments against bisphenol-A focus on what type of estrogenic activity it can promote (more proliferative activity), but that falls apart given that different phytoestrogens span the whole gamut of types of activation. Earlier research arguing for an association with estrogen-linked cancer seems to have fallen apart in more recent studies. It does seem associated with PCOS, but it's hard to describe it as a causal association, because PCOS is associated with all sorts of things, including diet (which could change the exposure rate vs. non-PCOS populations) and significant hormonal changes (which could change the clearance rate of bisphenol-A vs. non-PCOS populations). In short, bisphenol-A from polycarbonate is not without concern, but the concern level seems like it should be much lower than with nanoplastics.

Why bring this up? Because polycarbonate is a low-nanoplastic-emitting material. It is a quite resilient, heat tolerant plastic, and thus - being much further from its glass transition temperature - is not particularly prone to shedding nanoplastics. By contrast, its replacements - polyethylene, polypropylene, polyethylene terephthate, etc - are highly associated with nanoplastic release, particularly with hot liquids. So by banning polycarbonate, we increase our exposure to nanoplastics, which are much better associated with actual harms. And unlike bisphenol-A, which is rapidly eliminated from the body, nanoplastics persist. You can't get rid of them. If some big harm is discovered with bisphenol-A that suddenly makes the risk picture seem much bigger than with nanoplastics, we can then just stop using it, and any further harm is gone. But we can't do that with nanoplastics.

People seriously need to think more about substitution risks when banning products. The EU in particular is bad about not considering it. Like, banning neonicotinoids and causing their replacement by organophosphates, etc isn't exactly some giant win. Whether it's a benefit to pollinators at all is very much up in the air, while it's almost certain that the substitution is more harmful for mammals such as ourselves (neonicotinoids have very low mammalian toxicity, unlike e.g. organophosphates, which are closely related to nerve agents).

This is so true, so true.

And it's not even US specific. In the wake of the Ukraine war, German parliament voted to give itself 100 billion of additional taxpayer money (i.e. debt) to spend on defense. Recently a report came out of all the money spent so far, 90% did not go towards the intended purpose.

Why any of the jokers in charge of our governments are still not in jail baffles me more and more every year. Oh yes, it's because they make the rules, sorry, my bad.

That's what campaign donations get you, if they are large enough.

This is why congress occasionally bullies the big tech companies. We all think they might want to have some regulation or to punish them. Oh sweetie... they're saying "nice company you have there... would be a shame if something happened to it..."

The best time to leave github was when the evil empire bought it. The second best time is now.

Seriously. Anyone who thought MS wouldn't fuck it up in the same way they fuck up everything they touch can't be helped. It's Microsoft for crying out loud.