Guy’s profile picture is literally of Joseph Goebbels. I don’t think their opinion has much weight, nor are they worth spending time arguing with

I saw this headline earlier, except they chose to exclude any mention that the girl was Palestinian-American, or Muslim (example).

…I know? Believe it or not I’m aware of those decades and their aesthetics, I didn’t need you to condescendingly explain that to me. I was just saying that it was my first instinct, especially since some do resemble pride flags.

I was trying to read those stripes a pride flags, but I’m guessing by the creator that’s unlikely

Do you have a data feed to pull from, or some kind of list of matches? It shouldn’t be too hard to use a simple python script to parse a file and post automatically on a schedule. I maintain a repo that doesn’t exactly match your use case, but I could maybe add your functionality depending on complexity

Here’s my favourite picture of her.

Yeah see, I don’t think you get it. First of all the term has existed across multiple generations at this point, and really only unifies discussions of hegemonic masculinity that have spanned far longer.

Secondly, and more importantly, toxic masculinity has nothing to do with the “basis of gender”, unless of course you’re claiming that these traits are inherent to males, in which case I suggest you start with “The Second Sex” and work your way up to a real conversation. To put it simply for you, toxic masculinity is just a term used to encompass certain behaviours, and (more importantly) how they are taught and reinforced. It’s obviously more complex than that, I haven’t even mentioned the study of how the rigid enforcement of these behaviours can negatively affect men, but I suggest you learn from a book instead of random women on Lemmy.

Just because you don’t understand academic terminology doesn’t mean it is a buzzword

Bundaberg Spiced Ginger Beer

I think the Rabbit R1 is an underbaked and dumb product. That said, Rabbit would have had to have had a few too many kicks to the head if they seriously considered not just running Android under the hood. Android is open source, and there is no good reason to not utilize the hundreds of millions of dollars that Google has already poured into developing mature a mature operating system with all the drivers and frameworks they need.

As a moderator of a couple communities, some basic/copypasta misbehaviour is caught by automated bots that I largely had to bootstrap or heavily modify myself. Near everything else has to be manually reviewed, which obviously isn’t particularly sustainable in the long term.

Improving the situation is a complex issue, since these kinds of tools often require a level of secrecy incompatible with FOSS principles to work effectively. If you publicly publish your model/algorithm for detecting spam, spammers will simply craft their content to avoid it by testing against it. This problem extends to accessing third party tools, such as specialised tools Microsoft and Google provide for identifying and reporting CSAM content to authorities. They are generally unwilling to provision their service to small actors, IMO in an attempt to stop producers themselves testing and manipulating their content to subvert the tool.

The computer is probably locked down and all software/os provisioned by their IT department

This is the comment that tipped the maintainer over the edge:

ayan4m1

You should do a better job updating your documentation so that people do not waste their time like I did. This change to closed source was announced where, exactly? All of your READMEs and documentation sites do not mention this. Very easy to be confused and very disappointing to me that this went closed-source.

Not only did you sell out, you also removed all the old versions that were released under an open source license so that others couldn’t continue to use out-of-support versions. DISGUSTING.

tl;dr get off GitHub and npm entirely if you want to do the closed-source thing, kthx.

Which is incredibly disrespectful in my opinion, and this kind of entitlement is what makes me weary of starting any open source projects.

Go to your local transfem meetup

Seattle and Redmond. So Amazon and Microsoft?

Naming your chatbot Arya(n) is a red flag

Ok, so functionally reddit points, or a board of editors. Revolutionary.

Are you seriously suggesting that fucking reddit karma is how we should run our news.

Ok, so they do that. Here are some things that can plausibly go wrong:

• Are the people posting the story funding thing anonymous? Because if they are, no one will fund it based on a one line description with no details. If the authors are known, any company engaging in the practice will be watching them like a hawk (essentially making investigation impossible)
• The company engaging in the practice assumes the investigation is aimed at them and temporarily stops double billing until the journalists runs out of budget and everything blows over. They then resume double billing.
• The company engaging in the practice assumes the investigation is aimed at them and consequently intimidates would-be whistleblowers into staying silent, basically preventing any progress
• The company intentionally floods “Kickstarter for News” with spurious stories to drown out the item about them
• The story isn’t funded because it doesn’t agree with the preconceived notion of enough users, who are only willing to fund content matching their own worldview
• The story isn’t funded because, while people find it is important, more attention was placed on a story that agreed with the preconceived notion of enough users
• What stories are funded have a huge bias towards the material condition of the wealthy (moreso than now), since they are the only ones with enough disposable income to fund content. Therefore, content focused on the conditions of the poor and marginalised is ironically marginalised
• Unable to be subsidized by less prestigious entertainment content (like traditional investigative journalism was), the required upfront cost for stories balloons to a size not feasibly collected by donations
• The wider population becomes apathetic to the platform as a whole (people have actual jobs and lives, and may not have the time to trawl through potential stories for something they want to fund), leaving only the extremely wealthy/powerful to fund stories. As a consequence the media is even more controlled by the elite than it is currently
• It turns out there was never a story, and those that donated feel burned and are less likely to donate in the future
• It turns out there was never a story, and, feeling pressure to produce something, the journalists intentionally misconstrue the truth

I think a crowdsourced approach is a great idea, but only in the sense that my tax dollars go to independent news organisations.

That seems like a terrible idea. How are you supposed to properly investigate a story if you have to first disclose the entire lead to the world? Would this not create the same kind of overreaching editorialism that investigative journalists already push against, except now the person doing the editorialising is actually a whole pool of donors?