flamingos

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

/r/detrans

I checked it out and it seems like an absolute cesspool, so no 'discussions' like the what happens there aren't allowed.

In my experience, such communities and discussions very much do not toe the trans party line.

Here is a quote from the top post in that community today:

How long will we pretend they aren’t violent braindead porn-addicted narcissists who hate us because our existence challenges their narrative and provides a living experience for those ones who aren’t completely sure about transmuting themselves into fake males/females so that they can address what’s wrong with them and why they do feel so much distress about their bodies and biological sex?

Is it really any wonder why people not drowning in this trans-hating sludge would find this objectionable?

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I don't even know what 'detrans discussions' means. As long as you don't just use the fact some people transition as a cudgel against the idea of medical transition, then I don't see why not.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don't worry, I got you. Here's the alt-text:

@jk​@mastodon.social on Mastodon: "note to ui designers. when i'm reading a long piece of text. i select text while i read it. I select text while i read it!. i select the text using my mouse. while i read the text i often select the text. when i select the text i just want to select the text. i don't want to perform actions on the text. i don't want a popup menu to appear when i select the text. i don't want to accidentally click on a Share link. i want to select text while i read it".

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I'm complaining about pop-up widgets appearing when you select text, like the email icon here:

A clipping of a paragraph with some of the text selected and a box with an email icon above the selected text, obscuring the text underneath it.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It’s very rare that holding alt while selecting text doesn’t resolve this issue.

But I'm not actually looking to select the text when I do this, I'm just stimming and the extra visual noise is annoying.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 84 points 1 week ago (4 children)

No lie, I’ve actually had designers come to me with a concept for “a visual indicator that shows the user how they are progressing through the page”.

What the actual fuck, do these people actually use computers.

My biggest gripe is websites that take control of the browser C-f.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Link us your website then.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Looks correct, but boring as you kept it pretty readable, the total opposite of what a regex should be.

^(?:(?:feddit\.(?:i[te]|uk|org|de|nl))|(?:lemm(?:\.ee|y\.(?:ca(?:fe)?|ml|(?:sdf\.)?org|world|zip|nz|blahaj\.zone|dbzer0\.com)))|(?:sh\.itjust\.works|programming\.dev|sopuli\.xyz|jlai\.lu|aussie\.zone|beehaw\.org|slrpnk\.net))$

~~I am a weirdo who actually like regex~~

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

^(?:(?:feddit.(?:it|ie|uk|org|de|nl))|(?:lemmy.(?:cafe|ml|ca|org|world|zip|nz))|(?:sh.itjust.works|programming.dev|lemm.ee|sopuli.xyz|jlai.lu|lemmy.blahaj.zone|lemmy.dbzer0.com|aussie.zone|beehaw.org|lemmy.sdf.org|slrpnk.net))$

Shout out to my favourite lemmy instance, shmitjust🎃works. Real cool people.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago

I wouldn’t see an NHS study/report as “politically motivated”, and I don’t think it’s right if that’s the position of this instance. People claim that the science in favour of the COVID-19 vaccine being safe and effective as “politically motivated”. Some claimed that the dangers presented by COVID-19 were actually just politically motivated as well. Some real lunatics claim that science showing the earth is round is “politically motivated”. To me, it kinda just feels the same, I hope you understand. And in a way, I am concerned that an admin is using their rejection of a report that was produced by the National Health Service, and supported by the elected Government and His Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition to write rules.

I don't know what to say, the Cass review is just a bad piece of medical literature, it wasn't peer reviewed and Cass herself isn't even an expert in this area. From a peer-reviewed critique of it:

Using the ROBIS tool, we identified a high risk of bias in each of the systematic reviews driven by unexplained protocol deviations, ambiguous eligibility criteria, inadequate study identification, and the failure to integrate consideration of these limitations into the conclusions derived from the evidence syntheses. We also identified methodological flaws and unsubstantiated claims in the primary research that suggest a double standard in the quality of evidence produced for the Cass report compared to quality appraisal in the systematic reviews.
[…]
We have demonstrated that the Cass report’s application of EBM to GAC for children and young people is deeply flawed. Our critical analysis reveals significant methodological problems in the commissioned systematic reviews and primary research that undermine the validity of the Cass report’s recommendations. During our review of the report and supplementary primary research, we found insufficient statistical rigor, unreliable datasets, claims presented without evidence, and misrepresentation of quotes from primary research participants. These flaws highlight a potential double standard present throughout the review and its subsequent recommendations, where evidence for gender-affirming care is held to a higher standard than the evidence used to support many of the report’s recommendations. Considering this, and the Cass report’s poor understanding of transgender identities and experiences, it is vital to question the integrity and validity of the Review’s recommendations and the appropriateness of basing health policy on them. To uphold its commitment to evidence-based medicine, future gender-affirming care research must generate robust observational data, involve transgender communities, and prioritise patient-centred outcomes, ensuring validity, generalisability, and cultural relevance.

I can understand how with no context my comments look conspiratorial, but come on, my problems with the Cass review are clearly more substantive and based in reality than people who burned down 5G towers over a microchip injection conspiracy.

I do understand that context matters, though. I moderate a religious forum over at lemmy.world (which by the way- faces constant downvote brigading unfortunately), and our policy is to remove any mocking content. That’s just not the place.

That makes sense and I do wish people wouldn't just downvote a community because they disagree with the idea of it, I hate AI slop with a unrivaled passion but I don't mass downvote stuff in the "Stable " communities. Religion isn't important to me, but it is to many and there should be space for it here.

I appreciate your work in navigating such a landscape - moderating isn’t easy. And I’ll do my best to follow whatever regulations you choose to put in place, regardless if I protest the regulations themselves. This is a good and well-run instance.

Thank you, we set out here from Reddit with big dreams of building a better social media, I just wish better wasn't such a murky term. I do genuinely believe these guidelines are a part of achieving that.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago

What are you talking about, giving one of the only programming languages where binary sizes matters a tiny standard library is a great idea!

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 8 points 1 week ago

This is Dragon Age Veilguard.

 

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has published interim guidance following last week's Supreme Court decision. It instructs organisations that manage public spaces and workplaces to create segregated mixed-sex bathrooms, washing and changing facilities for Trans+ people to use.

It does this on the basis that same-sex spaces can only be used by people that align with the Supreme Court's definition of 'biological sex', while also saying that Trans+ perceived to be of the wrong gender can't use bathrooms that match their biological sex.

If taken beyond interim guidance and made statutory, it would be the biggest human rights disaster since racial segregation and apartheid.

The guidance covers workplaces, schools, and services open to the public, such as hospitals, shops and restaurants.

It stipulates that, where possible, mixed-sex toilets, washing and changing facilities should now be provided. In an interim period, it sets out where this is not possible, trans people should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use.

 

A British Transport Police spokesperson said: “Under previous policy, we had advised that someone with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) may be searched in accordance with their acquired sex, however as an interim position while we digest yesterday’s judgement, we have advised our officers that any same sex searches in custody are to be undertaken in accordance with the biological birth sex of the detainee.

“We are in the process of reviewing the implications of the ruling and will consider any necessary updates to our policies and practices in line with the law and national guidance.”

 

Archive

At the beginning of January, the Instagram account FutureRiderUS was posting AI videos of a motorcycle riding through futuristic landscapes – hence the name. Those videos usually would get anywhere from 20k to 30k views. But then, the fires started.

The next day, FutureRiderUS posted its own flaming Hollywood sign video. That one got a million views.
[…]
How much money did they make? It's hard to say exactly, but we can estimate.

Instagram pays people through programs where creators earn money based on how many views their Reels receive. The more viral a video, the longer users stay on the app, which allows Instagram to show more ads. Instagram then passes on some of the profit to the creator. How much? Meta doesn’t publish those numbers, and it varies depending on the audience that is looking at them. But I asked a few influencers, and the recent rate seems to be around $100~$120 per million views. Jason’s reporting shows that Facebook was paid out a few hundred dollars for single viral AI generated images, and Meta has paid out more than $2 billion through programs like Ads on Reels.

Just look at FutureRiderUS’s most popular posts from a roughly 24 hour stretch starting Jan 10:1m + 24m + 6m + 6m + 45m + 4m + 8m ≈ 94 million views.

That’s 94 million views, from typing in some prompts. Conservatively, this is likely worth thousands of dollars. Not a bad day’s work.
[…]
In the comments section of their most viral post (45 million views) featuring a firefighter carrying two baby bears to safety, they posted a response to angry commenters [about the AI-generated content]. Three days after the initial post, they commented, admitting that the post is AI-generated. They said, in part:

“In this video, I aimed to shed light on the reality of what is happening. These problems are very real—animals are dying, homes are being destroyed, and firefighters are risking their lives to save others. They don’t have the time to produce visually stunning and powerful footage to raise awareness about these issues. That’s why I took the initiative to create something that could help people see and truly think about these tragedies. […]

Through art, even when created by AI, we can evoke emotions, raise awareness, and inspire change.”

[…]
This sort of defensive, it-doesn’t-matter-if-it’s-fake stance is something that we are starting to notice more, as it’s used to justify the posting (and monetization) of everything from Palestinians to flood victims. But we shouldn’t lose track of the context: the main purpose of this account is to make money. It says so right on the page.

On January 18th, as the fires were still burning, FutureRiderUS posted a Reel advertising their $19.99 course on how to create viral content online by posting AI videos: “Earn $5000 a Month with Viral Videos - Zero Experience Needed - Start Today and Watch Your Life Change.”

[…] And for the account owner to suggest that they are motivated by something other than money seems disingenuous. There are no donation links, no mention of local organizations. Instead, the only call to action is to click the link to buy their viral video course.

10
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by flamingos@feddit.uk to c/backend@feddit.uk
 

Upgrading us to 0.19.11 (well 0.19.11-feddit). It should be less than 2 hours at the maximum.

Join the Matrix room for updates if anything goes wrong.

 

A list of recommendations produced by the EU-UK Parliamentary Partnership Assembly – a delegation of members from the UK and EU parliaments aimed at strengthening relations with the bloc – has urged the government to establish a “youth opportunity scheme”.

It is understood the scheme would operate similarly to proposals for a “youth mobility scheme”, which had become a major sticking point between the UK and EU.

It would allow 18- to 35-year-olds, including those doing apprenticeships, to move and work freely between countries for up to two years.

Britain already has a similar agreement with Australia and 12 other countries, including New Zealand, South Korea, Iceland, Uruguay, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

There is widespread support among the British public for such an agreement with the EU, with a YouGov survey of almost 15,000 people indicating that two-thirds (66 per cent) of people backed the scheme, compared to just one in five (18 per cent) who are opposed.

In Nigel Farage’s Clacton-on-Sea constituency, which voted overwhelmingly in favour of leaving the EU in 2016, more than twice as many people were in favour (57 per cent) than against (25 per cent) the idea of a mobility scheme.
[…]
There is now hope among MPs on the parliamentary delegation that the change in language will help to get the agreement over the line, as it is understood that a key stumbling bloc for ministers was the term “mobility” – amid fears critics would use it as evidence Labour is restoring freedom of movement.

342
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by flamingos@feddit.uk to c/okmatewanker@feddit.uk
view more: ‹ prev next ›