FourPacketsOfPeanuts @ FourPacketsOfPeanuts @lemmy.world

Posts

8

Comments

992

Joined

2 yr. ago

Way more public maneuvering to go before that I think..

Didn't have "NATO deployed against America" on my bingo card. Plenty of other batshittery, but not that one.

In the core of this reasoning is the idea that “men are inherently dangerous to women” therefore “women must know at all times the biological sex of any person they interact with”.

I don't believe that, just to be clear. But I think that's the view of a lot of people, and that's what i was outlining. because that was relevant to OP's question.

So you can’t go past the “transition” history for reasons that under all other circumstances you would decry as “misandry”,

I will assume you are not talking about me here as you have no idea of my point of view on the matter. I believe you are talking generically...

even if you are talking generically, i don't think your assumption here makes sense. many people feel free to discriminate between people on the basis of their biological sex. there are many contexts where (for example) men will accept they are treated differently but will not resort to calling this "misandry". at least in the settings i'm familiar with and amongst the people i've lived alongside here in London, UK. you may have very specific incidence in mind or may not be intending to speak universally, but you said "all other circumstances", which sounds pretty universal, so i'm just pointing out that's not correct..

entitled to hands down secrecy, given that a random bigot can just shoot them down for being trans with zero consequences.

I don't know where you live, but this is not true in the UK

while I agree with the thrust of what you are saying you have a writing style that puts words and assumptions in my mouth in a manner that comes across an unnecessarily combative. you also use exaggeration to make your point which is itself problematic..

True

Entirely unsurprised.

It doesn't particularly affect day to day life in the UK though

As a Brit, most of what's written here seems accurate and fairly up to date (ignore the sponsored links)

https://theportablewife.com/living-abroad/moving-to-london/moving-to-england-from-us/

Musk: more politically oriented than just money now, had aligned himself with a very large part of the population that thinks at a minimum that even if some people need to transition for their own health, society retains the right to consider their pre-transition history to still be part of reality

Zuckerberg: profit driven, is aligning Facebook etc with the political reality in America and the real prospect of being fined or embargoed by a Trump administration, would flip back if a democrat won in 2028

Rowling: belongs to a British generation of certain age where trans people are superficially accepted BUT regards their pre-trans history to be something still relevant. That's where this started and it escalated / deteriorated from there E.g. compassionate to a degree and willing to entertain the "fiction" that a biological man is now a women for the sake of that person's mental health: see them at the shops presenting female? carry on as normal.. talk to them? use their current name and pronouns out of politeness.. BUT.. if they want to access a female shelter, draw a line.. if they want to teach young children, risk assess them including their pre-trans gender and history etc. Rowling then got into increasingly fractious arguments on Twitter, largely arising from other people she followed and liked and what the trans community inferred from that. At that point she doubled down declaring advocates on Twitter to be increasingly hysterical and deluded whilst simultaneously insisting she would treat trans people humanely in person. She's then lashed out in numerous ways including in her writings aligning herself with increasingly extreme anti-trans people. FWIW, I think she would have carried on being a mildly tolerant (if dated) person of a certain age had she just stayed off Twitter entirely. But lashing out, being misinterpreted and misinterpreting others had led her to spiral down into viciousness and bitterness.

We were promised hyper-intelligent computer systems that would usher in an era of unparalleled prosperity and innovation.

With the advent of ChatGPT, some say these modern-day oracles have arrived.

Others say they are nothing but bullshit machines.

Technologists and publicists gush about how Large Language Models (LLMs) will revolutionize the way we work, learn, play, communicate, create, and connect to another.

They are right that artificial intelligence (AI) will affect nearly every aspect of our daily lives.

And they are right that by providing a way for people to talk with machines in ordinary language, LLMs constitute a dramatic step forward in making computing accessible to everyone.

Yet for all the good that AI systems will do, they will also saturate our information environment with bullshit at a scale we’ve never before encountered.

"I think it's going to be the most transformative technology humanity has ever created, potentially on par with or exceeding the invention of the printing press, electricity, and the internet." Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO

For better or for worse, LLMs are here to stay. We all read content that they produce online, most of us interact with LLM chatbots, and many of us use them to produce content of our own.

In a series of five- to ten-minute lessons, we will explain what these machines are, how they work, and how to thrive in a world where they are everywhere.

You will learn when these systems can save you a lot of time and effort. You will learn when they are likely to steer you wrong. And you will discover how to see through the hype to tell the difference. ?

Exercise in someone not particularly fit is also likely to trigger a stress response and their appetite will overcompensate. Exercise is good - everyone should be doing it - but for fat loss is pointless unless eating is well under control.

The human body is absurdly efficient. Fat weight is tackled by reducing calorie intake (using whatever tactic works for you). Exercise only makes a small difference by comparison.

Edit: for example, you could jog for almost an hour to burn approx 460 calories. Or you could just not eat 1 cinnamon swirl krispy kreme. Ate two at the family BBQ? You just gave your body enough fuel to light jog for 2 hours. A large vanilla milkshake has enough fuel to keep you jogging for an hour and a half. Stop overeating first or gym weightloss is useless.

I suppose they're both highly charged and make specific points with the goal of providing illuminated information

Thanks

Am in the UK so am safe from that for the time being..

I find it's more often than not 'heavyweight' texts, especially on history articles where really really niche researchers have books or papers on the matter. That's useful. But I'm generally more after what a professor would assign first year students as an introduction to The Romantics or English Painters. Sometimes Wikipedia has that, sometimes it has "Brush techniques employed by Turner in the summer of 1798 by Prof George Bannister, Prof Rodger Walker et al."

Pretty much what I do. Sometimes I find the list isn't public or the course is more niche than in interested in.

Thank you, never seen that before

I guess we can expect the amount of time it spends up to be counted in minutes..

• People who thought Tyler Durden was cool
• Almost everything about Starship Troopers
• people who think Bickle (Taxi Driver) is a hero

Has Perry Bible Fellowship vibes. What's this from?

Reddit makes perfect sense: having you there is no longer profitable.

Fuck them to be honest..

Have you considered putting your gaming pc in one of the storage freezers? /s