Feathercrown

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Feathercrown,

Thr “federation” you say? ;)

Feathercrown,

Can’t they just ban auto/semi-auto? Or if those aren’t strict categories, define them, eg. “cannot shoot more than x bullets / second”? That one would likely be too broad but you get the idea.

Feathercrown,

Bro what are you on about nobody else knows what you’re saying

Feathercrown,

I do think it would be helpful to have more clarity on the definitions of terms for different states of transitioning/non-transitioning but unfortunately that’s outweighed by the privacy concerns and the infighting and effort it would cause

Feathercrown,

It’s less about having the language and more about agreeing on the specifics of what language we do have. That’s not gatekeeping, just categorization. Mildly useful but people calling it “gatekeeping” is exactly why it wouldn’t be helpful to try to define it in practice (don’t mean to attack you, just taking an example).

Feathercrown,

I feel an urge to say “oh well” but that’s my own bias shining through lol

Feathercrown,

Well, the easiest example is that some people use “trans” to mean anyone who has physicslly started to transition, others consider someone to be trans when they decide to broadcast their new gender identity, and others consider them to have always been trans. The opinion on which one is correct is often quite strong.

You could define it as “anyone who says they’re trans is trans” and avoid this entire issue, which is largely what the relevant laws do (unless they’re weirdly invasive), but that opens up the system for abuse by bad actors looking to false flag the trans community.

Feathercrown,

Gatekeeping as I’m using it in this context is the act of unnecessarily excluding someone from a community or diminishing their attempts to participate*. That’s why I think the best definition of most personal identity terms is a permissive one, eg. “anyone who decides to transition is trans”. But opening up that definition means we need another way to refer to people who are physically transitioning, because there are meaningful differences in their experiences and needs. (“Physically transitioning” honestly suits this purpose fine IMO.)

But there’s nothing wrong with choosing a narrower definition if you don’t use that to discriminate or exclude non-physically-transitioning trans people from spaces that could apply to them. It’s not a good idea because that message is easily able to be twisted to be exclusionary, but there’s nothing inherently gatekeeping about it; the term that would be common use would likely just become the one that refers to all types of trans people. Defining “trans” to be narrower than the wider definition is only wrong because we’re attached to the current definition. Which is a very good reason to keep that word defined as the broader group, but again someone who isn’t familiar with this would rightly see it as a valid definition.

  • note that the precise definition matters here, as I believe it does with a great many things
Feathercrown,

So I agree with the first half pretty well, you make some good points. But:

there’s nothing inherently gatekeeping about it;

Yes there is. It’s defining folk who medically transition as being a different class of trans folk. We’re not a different class. We all of us have unique needs, and the language should focus on those individual needs, whether they’re medical, social or other.

In general, just because everyone has unique needs/qualities/etc., that doesn’t mean that it’s not useful to have categories anyways. Although in this case perhaps you’re right, the situations are often complicated enough that it would be too reductive. In extending my wider pro-categorization stance to this issue in particular I may have ignored the naturally complex nature of it.

I get lumped in with people who genuinely believe statements like this.

I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to, and you reacted differently enough compared to the rest of what I said that I think you may have misinterpreted my stance here?

It denies people the right to their own identity. That is inherently bad.

And that’s why I started this off by saying that it wouldn’t be productive to argue for this. Even if I were correct in theory*, nobody who this matters for would ever accept my definition, or any definition, other than the one that they believe to be true. You cannot force someone to accept a label that they don’t want, even if there would be benefits to using it. Although given what you said I’m not sure now that there would be benefits anyways.

*as far as that could apply to language, anyways

Feathercrown,

Lose my last shred of faith in this country, mostly

Feathercrown,

I think there’s a German story where some guy goes around killing children

Many such cases

Feathercrown,

Jack Johnson has an interesting version of Rudolf that’s related here

Feathercrown,

Release it on steam deck but just make it a blank screen since they’re already experiencing owning a steam deck

Feathercrown,

This is gold

Feathercrown,

Brave move saying that’s stupid on lemmy lmao

Feathercrown,

Yeah it’s wild how different software things are when you understand how they work

Feathercrown,

Posting each panel separately is a neat idea

Feathercrown,

Please tell me if you find one

Feathercrown,

Because I use a language that was invented more than 1 year ago

Feathercrown,

Isn’t a Maybe enum equivalent to just using a return value of, for example, int | null with type warnings?

Feathercrown,

Isn’t that also true with compile-time type checking though? Eg. 0 + x where x is int|null would be detected? I don’t have much experience here so I could be wrong but I can’t think of a case where they’re not equivalent

Feathercrown,

Yeah it’s nice to be able to see it

Feathercrown,

I got into that during covid and watched the whole thing. It’s all on Youtube for free which is crazy to me

Feathercrown,

That’s really not my experience with D&D. It’s fairly common to play in games without too many awkward interactions.

Feathercrown,

Doom gloom doom gloom humanity sucks blaaaargh

Feathercrown,

Yeah the DFH makes no sense. It requires that all forms of nearby alien life exist, but either choose to be completely silent (somehow) without knowing that other life exists, or to have found out that other life exists and chosen to be silent before broadcasting literally anything decipherable.

Feathercrown,

“Wait, that earth video is AI-generated-- their hands only have five fingers!”

Feathercrown,

I’m a little tired of everyone being such a doomer all the time tbh. No they wouldn’t, and The Boys isn’t realistic, it’s cynical. Maybe you believe you would start doing immoral things given this power, but that doesn’t mean that everyone else would. If the only thing stopping you from doing it was the potential consequences, then you didn’t have those morals in the first place; you always wanted to do those things, you just didn’t have the ability.

That being said, I would totally do things that are illegal but not against my own morals. Do you know what you could do with that kind of power? You’d be like Dr. Manhattan, the only superpowered individual in the world. Anything you want to be the case (physically), given enough time, you could make it happen. Whether your desires are good or bad, there’s really no reason not to enact them. TL;DR: Things go very differently depending on who gets this power.

Feathercrown,

Wow that’s a good artist list, I didn’t know Qumu was on Spotify!

Feathercrown,

Banger picks!

Feathercrown,

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3e09367a-ec57-4c4f-b266-7fb55b389241.png

The songs are a bit weird to me? But the artists are pretty accurate.

Feathercrown,

My parents have a hedge but I’ve never thought about this… the green is so much thinner than I’d expect, but of course it is; very little light reaches the inside.

Feathercrown,

Speak for yourself

Feathercrown,

Yeah, why?

Feathercrown,

It’s gotten better. Still some weird stuff but it has cool stuff too now.

Feathercrown,

IQ correlates with a good number of things though. It’a not perfect but it’s not meaningless either.

Feathercrown,

Not perfectly you can’t. But similarly to how people’s SAT scores predict their future success, IQ tests in aggregate do have predictive power.

Feathercrown,

“I’ll always be right here… on the face of the $-12 bill.”

“Wow, this is worthless!”

“It’s less than worthless, my boy!”

Feathercrown,

Teleportation 100%. I could be anywhere on Earth, at any time. Invisibility is super cool but its most practical applications are kinda weird tbh. Being there without people knowing is basically always a privacy violation.

Feathercrown,

A LEMMING HAS POSED A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION IN LEGO CITY

Feathercrown,

submit report saying I violated this law

instant “this sentence is false”-style paradox

legal system implodes. Complete anarchy takes over

Feathercrown,

Not the person you were responding to, but I’m knowledgeable on the topic. What you’re describing is simulated evolution, and it can (and has!) been used to make anything from antennas to spray nozzles to mixer blades. Basically, you start with one or multiple base designs, then slowly alter parameters about the design (for antennas, this could be length, number of loops, loop direction, etc., or it could be more granular, like starting from a stump and extending or branching in random directions).

You generally have a group of candidate designs, called a “generation”, then randomly select from these designs, weighted towards the ones which perform better, and “kill” the underperforming ones. Then you make random mutations on the remaining members of the old generation to create a new generation. Continue until you have generations that are performing better than your current manual designs, if the evolution manages to reach that point.

There are additional things you can do to solve certain issues the evolutionary process might run into, like taking the parameters for your new generation from two parents instead of one (essentially, this goes from single-celled mitosis to sexual reproduction, and can allow two different evolutionary lines to share their progress).

Feathercrown,

Oh neat, our program for that is not worth it at all lmao

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • KamenRider
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • KbinCafe
  • Socialism
  • oklahoma
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • All magazines