FaelynnUpward

Thirty nine year old trans femme who is into things. What’re you… a cop? Going to uninstall for a while.

[depsidase]

[swiftrunnerfelidae]

every so often I remember when they crashed a train into a nuclear waste storage container, on purpose, to demonstrate how durable they were, and the storage container didn't lose any measurable containment whatsoever.

meanwhile, coal power plants can spray radioactive coal ash willy-nilly into the atmosphere all day and all night, but noooo, it's nuclear power that's the scary bad polluter.

[gondwana]

[beemovieerotica]

please say sike

[faelynnupward]

How do you know what is going on around characters without descriptions?

How do you know what they look like? How do you know if they’re deep in the forest evading being caught by the king’s men or that the shaded alley they’re in in the capital has rats scurrying under detritus and this is where the secret bolthole is?

Do you only read books that have characters verbalize everything around them like a narrator?

Truly horrifying. “I read ‘x’ book” implies you read the whole thing, to me. Liking the dialogue most is cool but it is only half the book (sometimes less). Maybe you should read more plays…

Especially if you’re on booktok bragging about your kill rate.

Imagine fast forwarding through an action movie and only watching the dialogue and then bragging it only took you 25 minutes to watch a 115 minute movie. If that is how you enjoy your films, you do you boo, but if you find the people around you making a face when you tell them how you watch so many movies you ought to know why.

[trans-sapphic-mess]

If that trans girl gets super weirdly apologetic, like is borderline apologizing for breathing or is apologizing for things that are basically nothing/happened forever ago, whatever you do, do not leave her alone. Chances are it's one of two things, and neither of them are good; she's either bordering on a breakdown and thinks basically everything she does is wrong, or is past that point and desperately wants to make sure no one's angry at her before she hurts herself/takes her own life. You might think it's weird, you might get tired of it and want to push her away, but for the love of god do not do that. Her apologizing every 0.5 seconds is because she's been taught not to value her own emotions, but they're overpowering her and she doesn't know what to do other than apologize like her life depends on it. Her life might not depend on it, but it very well could depend on how you respond to her heart's most desperate cries for help

[mousidy]

a gentle, sweet "are you apologizing for the sun shining? :)" is one of my favorite ways to respond to other trans women who apologize for existing, for taking up space, for having needs, for wanting to be known and loved. you have to let her know she matters to you, that her presence is like the sunshine

when I treat trans women this way, I notice they apologize less over time and get more comfortable voicing their needs to me without shrinking themselves

[doyoulovethewayzeylily]

it's not. what if we killed whoever taught you to feel that way

[cilceon]

Google’s removal of its search function is going great btw

(A reminder that if you have Firefox/ublock origin this won’t be a problem if you don’t wanna switch search engines to DuckDuckGo)

[faelynnupward]

I’ve been using Startpage. It apparently uses Google’s search engine without any tracking or sponsored pages. I have its beta AI turned off.

It feels like I’m using Google from 2012. Honestly, a breath of fresh air.

[closet-keys]

the struggle for bodily autonomy over sexed characteristics would be a lot stronger if cis women did not exceptionalize their own healthcare needs as fundamentally different and more important than trans people's.

cis women's fight is part of our larger fight, but too many do not want to make these connections. a cis woman will fight for the right to abortion, hormonal birth control, labor protections against discrimination for pregnancy, etc. as an entirely disconnected struggles from access to other gendered surgeries, hormonal treatments, and labor protections against gendered discrimination. but they are not disconnected.

this perceived separation between these struggles is only in one direction. for example, the disparity between the percent of trans people who openly defend the right of cis girls accessing abortion at any age without needing parental consent (almost all of us) and the percent of cis women who defend the right of trans kids accessing transition care at any age without needing parental consent is stark. and that is very depressing to me.

whenever I draw obvious parallels, I get notes from cis women telling me how disgusting it is to compare our healthcare to theirs. they tell me in a variety of ways that their politically controversial gendered healthcare needs are obviously legitimate, unlike ours.

but all of our healthcare is getting criminalized and dismantled. you talk to a reactionary and they do not believe your healthcare is a legitimate need either. they also say cis women who get abortions are selfish, sex-obsessed, and a danger to children. this is the same fight and too many cis women refuse to acknowledge it.

whenever I see posts talking about defending pregnant women (not people, but women) the notes are full of transphobic cis women. I saw one the other day where a USian in the notes was saying "this is why women become republicans, because at least the right respects pregnant women." do they? how is that alliance going?

I want cis women to understand that the struggle for bodily autonomy over sexed characteristics is one struggle. insisting on this rhetorical distinction between us is a reactionary move. it calls people with regressive gender politics to your side even if you do not intend for that to happen. it reproduces the conditions that are currently stripping you of your rights, too.

what would it take for you to accept the solidarity trans people are already extending to you? what would it take for you to actually hold solidarity with us?

[theknightlywolfe]

When the CEO of the company that didn't turn away Nazi business says "this isn't going to work" you know it's bad.

[sztupy]

Landmark German ruling declares Google's AI Overviews are Google's own words and makes it liable for false answers

A German regional court has ruled that Google is directly liable for the content of its AI search overviews. According to the court, previou

[ayeforscotland]

Let’s fucking go

[made-in-manetheren]

This is HUGE.

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.

TL;DR Google reeeeeally stepped in it this time.

[theconcealedweapon]

If you want people to work in order to "contribute to society", then you support socialism. Capitalism is working to enrich the people who own the means of production.

[faelynnupward]

Right? People don’t have a problem with work. They have a problem with working more hours for less pay so that rich pricks can have five yachts.

If I was working and I could look around me and see how the people in my building or on my block or in my village benefited from that work, I think I would be much less dour about work in general.

It is working so 80% of the value of your labor ends up in a bank account on the other side of the country with a tiny cadre of suited middle aged white dudes controlling it and trying to figure out how to make it 85%.

[fandomsandfeminism]

This may be the best Pride merch I've seen from a major corporation.

Levi's said yes, actually. Assless chaps and a biker vest. Happy Pride.

And the assless chaps sold out on June 1.

[aetherograph]

They also specifically contacted members of the leather community, used them as models iirc, and donated $100k to Outright International. They talked the talk and walked the walk and put their money on it too. I don't really care that I can't afford and don't want this merch, I love to see my community getting the respect it deserves. Levi's said, "We make jeans which gays wear lots of jeans? Oh leather daddies? Let's call them."

[fandomsandfeminism]

I think Levi's donates to Outreach International every year too, as well as sponsoring pride events and other community support. They were offering Same Sex domestic partner benefits to employees in the 90s, and have been very public about their support for pro-lgbt legislation all through the 2000s.

So, you know, a giant corporation that walks the walk pretty consistently.

[faelynnupward]

This is heartwarming, as far as corporate support can ever be heartwarming at least.

Still… there is one thing that bothers me:

Chaps are, definitionally, ass-less. They were designed to be worn over pants to protect the legs from mud, rain, and dry brush scratches while on horseback.

There is no such thing as Assed Chaps. Assed chaps would just be pants made of heavy leather. Chaps are functionally Ass-less Pants.

[socialmaya]

Occasionally forget people genuinely think capitalism is thousands of years old

[sylestial]

One time I was talking about Robin Hood with some coworkers and one guy was like “he was bad because the people he helped learned to expect handouts” and I wanted to be like… okay can you explain how that flawed capitalist propaganda applies to feudalism

[scallioncreamcheesebagel]

reminder that capitalism was literally invented in the 16th century

[tayefeth]

That’s an exaggeration. What was invented in the 16th century was mercantilism. Capitalism really dates for the beginning of the nineteenth century, with the rise of industry and cash crops over artisans and merchants. Vulture capitalism, with the notion that companies have no duties other than generating profit, is even younger.

[antique-scarecrow]

Capitalism is only 200 years old and I have to say, they have not been an impressive 200 years

[downtroddendeity]

I think a lot of this comes from the fact that most people don’t know the formal definition of capitalism. We all know the word, we’ve all seen the jokes, but very few people bother to actually define it unless they’re talking about political theory and philosophy, so it’s easy to end up with the impression that Capitalism = Money Can Be Exchanged For Goods And Services.

Capitalism is the economic system where most of the means of production (i.e. everything people need to have to make the stuff that everyone wants) are owned by private individuals or corporations, who then hire people to provide the labor necessary to produce things, with the intent of selling the output at a profit. It’s the difference between “you’re a carpenter and you make a chair and you sell it” and “you’re Richard Q. Richington who owns a chair factory, and you pay people to sell the chairs you paid other people to make and then all the excess money goes back to you.” There have been Richard Q. Richingtons on and off throughout history, but that being the norm for every single industry is a pretty recent development.

[antiterfbutch]

An alarming amount of people seem to think capitalism = all trade, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

[theconcealedweapon]

[faelynnupward]

I can’t believe how sinister these clueless traitors try to make trans people seem with this kind of shit.

The random response is so on the nose it is amazing. I doubt a trans person could have come up with a better rebuke than for a cis het person to respond that “You’re all parasites, not just the T.”

[socialjusticeinamerica]

[faelynnupward]

No, the reason we're in trouble is that greasy rat finks like Mike Johnson have spent 50 years polishing rich guy knob by cutting taxes over and over and over again.

The ONLY people who have become more prosperous have been the rich.

[depsidase]

[vensuera]

It’s funny because that English man fails to realize he’s a part of the institution that taught the American patriot this behavior.

[faelynnupward]

It is a bit rich given that the Abolitionism movement in the UK only really kicked off in 1772 (Somerset v. Stewart) when it was determined that slavery had no legal or historical basis in British law. The UK made the sale of new slaves illegal in 1807 and slavery illegal entirely in 1833, so they were barely ahead of American Abolitionism.

Like "Oh those uncultured philistines in the US for not knowing what we know (as of three and half years ago)."

It is only worth remarking that Thomas Day is wholly correct in his assertion but he manages to be so in a way so uniquely English. That is to say in a deeply, eye-wateringly condescending way.

[depsidase]

[cream-chantilly]

@isuggesteatingtherich

[faelynnupward]

The fact that most of the companies pushing AI super hard have founders/owners/CEOs who were literally front and center at Trump's inauguration last year makes this feel less like a conspiracy theory and more like a small logical step. Half of those companies now have lucrative contracts with the government.

[butchflirt]

“We will not blame him for the crimes of his ancestors if he relents the royal rights of his ancestors; but as long as he claims their rights, by virtue of descent, then, by virtue of descent, he must shoulder the responsibility for their crimes.”

— Séamas Ó Conghaile, an Edinburgh-born Irish Republican and socialist, on King George V; a sentiment that transcends time. (via tal-eire)