[ruby-white-rabbit]

Look I know everyone is getting the porn bot follows but like .. what's are they even for? What's the point of them? What are they trying to accomplish?

[ralfmaximus]

Okay, so... tumblr is 'free' right? It costs nothing to create an account and utilize the service. So the startup costs of running a pornbot army is zero, right?

Wrong!

Shady websites sell kits to create/operate pornbot networks. You pay $$$ for an engine and a collection of scripts tuned for various free websites. And apparently (I guess) there is a new tumblr script that comes preloaded with a zillion girlie names + 3 digits, so all the prospective pornbot meister has to do is start the script with some seed values and wait for their bot army to grow.

In order to fly beneath the radar, these scripts operate in stages. First they create the account then follow a few high profile blogs. THAT is why, when they first follow you, they're just a generic stolen cheesecake pic named (randomly generated name) ChestyMoorbutt754 with an otherwise empty profile.

Then after a preset number of days/weeks they start blogging 'content' like bit.ly links to malware or whatever. Along with some legit-looking reblogs to keep up appearances. All these scripted behaviors are configurable.

Their hope is that some certain percentage of idiots will (1) click thru the hosted links to an intermediary landing page (with ads, naturally) that acts as a portal to buy subs for OnlyFans, Sinder etc, or (2) interact with an actual chatbot that eventually convinces the poor schmuck to enter their credit card info so it can be hijacked.

We're seeing a new flood of bots NOW because twitter is floundering and all the talk about twitter alternatives (like tumblr) has caught the attention of the guys who make/sell pornbot tools.

Who are the ones REALLY making profit off all of this. Not the pornbots themselves, but the darkweb dweebs who sell the accounts & kits. Because selling access to pornbot armies is guaranteed income whereas who the hell knows how successful any given pornbot will be in the wild. After awhile, the pornbot army gets detected & shutdown or the customer running the botnet get disillusioned and quits or both... then the cycle begins anew with new sheep to be fleeced.

Just like in the 1840s gold rush era, it wasn't the miners who got rich; it was the guys selling picks & shovels.

[365filmsbyauroranocte]

Les années Super 8 (Annie Ernaux & David Ernaux-Briot, 2022)

[thedreadvampy]

male gaze is not 'when person look sexy' or 'when misogynist make film'

death of the author is not 'miku wrote this'

I don't think you have to read either essay to grasp the basic concepts

death of the author means that once a work is complete, what the author believes it to mean is irrelevant to critical analysis of what's in the text. it means when analysing the meaning of a text you prioritise reader interpretation above author intention, and that an interpretation can hold valid meaning even if it's utterly unintentional on the part of the person who created the thing. it doesn't mean 'i can ignore that the person who made this is a bigot' - it may in fact often mean 'this piece of art holds a lot of bigoted meanings that the author probably wasn't intentionally trying to convey but did anyway, and it's worth addressing that on its own terms regardless of whether the author recognises it's there.' it's important to understand because most artists are not consciously and vocally aware of all the possible meanings of their art, and because art is communal and interpretive. and because what somebody thinks they mean, what you think somebody means, and what a text is saying to you are three entirely different things and it's important to be able to tell the difference.

male gaze is a cinematographic theory on how films construct subjectivity (ie who you identify with and who you look at). it argues that film language assumes that the watcher is a (cis straight white hegemonically normative) man, and treats men as relatable subjects and women as unknowable objects - men as people with interior lives and women as things to be looked at or interacted with but not related to. this includes sexual objectification and voyeurism, but it doesn't mean 'finding a lady sexy' or 'looking with a sexual lens', it means the ways in which visual languages strip women of interiority and encourage us to understand only men as relatable people. it's important to understand this because not all related gaze theories are sexual in nature and if you can't get a grip on male gaze beyond 'sexual imagery', you're really going to struggle with concepts of white or abled or cis subjectivities.

[rednines]

[redrola]

[cchabibi]

[tedllasso]

FLORENCE PUGH for Netflix Queue

[danger]

[hollowboobtheory]

when I was like 10 I learned that splitting an atom will make a nuclear explosion and for a long time I got really stressed out whenever I had to cut anything bc like. what if I hit an atom at just the right angle

[iknowthis]

[sseoulful]

[rai-r]

[oliviamobbs]

[the-devil-wears-zara]

[aus-yeezus]

[ates-kadehii-deactivated2019081]

[aoca]