What are you anticipating for the automated driving adoption rate? I’m expecting extremely low as most people cannot afford new cars. We are talking probably decades before there are enough automated driving cars to fundamentally alter traffic in such a way as to entirely eliminate human driving culture.

In response to the “humans are fallible” bit ill remark again that algorithms are very fallible. Statistically, even. And while lots of automated algorithms are controlling life and death machines, try justifying that to someone who’s entire family is killed by an AI. How do they even receive compensation for that? Who is at fault? A family died. With human drivers we can ascribe fault very easily. With automated algorithms fault is less easily ascribed and the public writ large is going to have a much harder time accepting that.

Also, with natural gas and other systems there are far fewer variables than a busy freeway. There’s a reason why it hasn’t happened until recently. Hundreds of humans all in control of large vehicles moving in a long line at speed is a very complicated environment with many factors to consider. How accurately will algorithms be able to infer driving intent based on subtle movement of vehicles in front of and behind it? How accurate is the situational awareness of an algorithm, especially when combined road factors are involved?

Its just not as simple as its being made out to be. This isnt a chess problem, its not a question of controlling train cars on set tracks with fixed timetables and universal controllers. The way cars exist presently is very, very open ended. I agree that if 80+% of road vehicles were automated it would have such an impact on road culture as to standardize certain behaviors. But we are very, very far away from that in North America. Most of the people in my area are driving cars from the early 2010s. Its going to be at least a decade before any sizable amount of vehicles are current year models. And until then algorithms have these obstacles that cannot easily be overcome.

Its like I said earlier, the last 10% of optimization requires an exponentially larger amount of energy and development than the first 90% does. Its the same problem faced with other forms of automation. And a difference of 10% in terms of performance is… huge when it comes to road vehicles.

Exactly. Bring back trams, build less suburbs, better apartment housing. If we want a society reorganized around accessibility then let’s actually build that.

I never did say it wouldn’t ever be possible. Just that it will take a long time to reach par with humans. Driving is culturally specific, even. The way rules are followed and practiced is often regionally different. Theres more than just the mechanical act itself.

The ethics of putting automation in control of potentially life threatening machines is also relevant. With humans we can attribute cause and attempted improvement, with automation its different.

I just don’t see a need for this at all. I think investing in public transportation more than reproduces all the benefits of automated cars without nearly as many of the dangers and risks.

I am entirely opposed to driving algorithms. Autopilot on planes works very well because it is used in open sky and does not have to make major decisions about moving in close proximity to other planes and obstacles. Its almost entirely mathematical, and even then in specific circumstances it is designed to disengage and put control back in the hands of a human.

Cars do not have this luxury and operate entirely in close proximity to other vehicles and obstacles. Very little of the act of driving a car is math. It’s almost entirely decision making. It requires fast and instinctive response to subtle changes in environment, pattern recognition that human brains are better at than algorithms.

To me this technology perfectly encapsulates the difficulty in making algorithms that mimic human behavior. The last 10% of optimization to make par with humans requires an exponential amount more energy and research than the first 90% does. 90% of the performance of a human is entirely insufficient where life and death is concerned.

Investment costs should be going to public transport systems. They are more cost efficient, more accessible, more fuel/resource efficient, and far far far safer than cars could ever be even with all human drivers. This is a colossal waste of energy time and money for a product that will not be par with human performance for a long time. Those resources could be making our world more accessible for everyone, instead they’re making it more accessible for no one and making the roads significantly more dangerous. Capitalism will be the end of us all if we let them. Sorry that train and bus infrastructure isnt “flashy enough” for you. You clearly havent seen the public transport systems in Beijing. The technology we have here is decades behind and so underfunded its infuriating.

Its very convenient that corporations can both be people and not be people depending on whatever outcome is best for them.

I’m considering this and how best we can implement a practical solution to this. One possibility would be to add a rule asking that timeline posts add some or all pictures not in the main post but in the comments. Another would be to remove image posts entirely and direct that traffic towards other communities.

I think the NSFW tag is a good idea, if our community didnt already have a rule banning NSFW image posts. I also would prefer to keep the NSFW tag connected with NSFW content cause I think starting to use it for other things would diminish its use for actually filtering out NSFW content.

I feel the same about dogs honestly. I prefer older small dogs because I find that when they do cross my boundaries I’m less likely to be injured in anyway. I honestly dont know how I would be able to live with large dog. Its funny that you say that cats cross boundaries a lot, because my experience has definitely been the opposite 😅 a dog is the size of a person too. When those cross my boundaries I usually get physically hurt. I suppose the experience of other people must be different lol

Its working, horrifyingly. In several communities lately ive seen moderators start to treat violent racism and antisemitism as personal beliefs that do not on their own necessitate banning. This in private progressive leaning communities too. Eugencist christian white nationalism is becoming a normal tolerated ideology to have.

Instagram is especially bad too. I see a lot of people talking about Twitter, but not enough about Instagram.

Ive had incredible luck thrifting. I usually go once every 2 weeks and only take items I really like. Early on I stuck to sports bras cause theyre more forgiving as you grow, so they last a bit longer.

A line silhouettes tend to look good when your hips aren’t super wide, as your fat moves around tho your hips will fill out. More than anything have fun with it. Try new clothes outside your comfort zone. Get lots of accessories too!! Putting together an outfit with accessories is so much fun. Gives you the opportunity to further express yourself 😊

Not OP, but i can say 2 years post op it feels weird to think I used to have something there lol

Congratulations Dandelion, so happy for you 😊

If by personal and intimate you meant about bodies or relationships or surgeries or sex or, I mean really anything related to being transfeminine then yeah you can absolutely discuss those things here. Adult content should be labeled as NSFW, the usage of slurs in titles should be avoided, but as long as the rules are being followed thats all that matters.

Empathy isn’t your strong suit is it. Nor apparently is carrying a serious conversation or responding to basic questions. Id love for you to point out what constitutes vitriol in that comment. Because no the comment as a whole is not vitriolic. I didnt call you names, I didnt insult you. I responded very deliberately and explained how I feel about this exact subject. Unless youre operating on a different definition of the word.

I dont get where this accusation that I am vitriolic is coming from, nor that I am asking you to be angry? I said that summarizing Joanne as a “shit person” puts her on par with like a guy at work who makes passively bigoted comments about his coworkers.

This is exactly what I have been talking about throughout this thread. People act like what she has done is just like, mildly bad or distasteful or something. Like she said a slur once or something. She is creating an international legal movement to attack my community. Thats an incredibly serious discussion to me.

You also didnt call her a monster, not in the comment I responded to anyhow. Its not a matter of my liking, its a matter of people downplaying the severity of who she is and what she has done. I’ve lost friends in the past 2 years due to rising hatred against our community. We live in fear of genocidal violence against us, and she is one of the loudest voices in the movement creating genocidal violence against us.

I dont understand where this defensiveness comes from for you, exactly. You and several other people here are acting like this is a casual difference of opinion when obviously to me and other people it isn’t. I never insulted you, nor anyone else here. I have been upset and I have emphasized my opinion as this is obviously a subject that matters a lot to me. If you disagree with something I’ve said you can respond to it, instead of claiming that my issue is “you’re not vitriolic/angry enough for my liking”?

Calling Joanne a shit person is incredibly dismissive of who she is and what she has done.

Youre spreading apologia for people supporting a woman who is extremely harmful to my community. I’m not going to passively sit back and watch you attempt to downplay how serious this conversation is to us. You ignored my comment and I did bring it over here when I saw you saying the same thing in an adjacent comment (this is all under my original comment, I see the updates). I’m not interested in people spreading support direct or indirect for Joanne Rowling on my home instance. I will argue against that every single step of the way.

I maintain what I said. Everyone has a line. Murder, sexual violence, child abuse, you know everyone has a point beyond which they will no longer consume content produced by someone. By continuing to consume content produced by Joanne Rowling, they are saying that she hasn’t done anything enough to actually make the content she produced unethical to consume. There are always exceptions when it comes to art. I’m never going to convince people not to like something. But they can and should have to sit with the shame of that. The least they can do is own it, “yes spearheading an international movement to attack the rights of queer people is not enough for me to give up my favorite childhood author”. If that’s it for them, great. They’re people who should probably stay away from the trans community. But to try and act like “No matter what an artist does it doesn’t matter, their art is still sacred on its own and enjoyable without any ethical implcations” is ridiculous.

We’re adult members of a community facing an ongoing outside attempt to literally destroy us. She is the figurehead of a movement thats sole aim is to entirely drive us out of society, an aim she is aware will kill us. If thats not enough for someone to drop a fucking book series than clearly trans lives dont matter too damn much to them.

I do think on some level piracy is more ethical than paying her money, but I still see consuming her work in any form as unethical. I think everyone has an internal line beyond which they will no longer consume or engage with art created by someone. Like child abusers tends to be a major one, or sexual assaulters or murderers. Not that these are hard lines that immediately disqualify any art from consumption, but I think most would agree that consuming art knowingly made by people who do those things is wrong and unethical. There’s exceptions as always, loads of famous people running around who do those things who’s art people love. But still I think that its hard to defend that, and that most people have a line somewhere.

By continuing to consume her work you are indirectly stating that she hasn’t done anything to cross that line for you. (Not you specifically, the proverbial you) I don’t think it’s impossible to let go of content created by harmful people, or that anyone categorically can never do that. I think to suggest that is kind of ridiculous. Like I doubt many people would seriously defend listening to and enjoying Diddy’s music.

Its not a matter of separating it from her. She isnt dead, shes still alive and consuming her work is kind of a passive endorsement. You know, sure she might be the figurehead of a movement that literally rejects transgender people from society, but thats not enough to give me pause in reading and enjoying her content.

Do you think listening to Chris Brown is cool? What about Diddy? You know separating art from the artist and what not. Consuming art is apparently an entirely neutral activity with no real world implications or consequences, so surely being like “sure Diddy is a serial sexual abuser, but I just adore his music. I’m capable of separating art from the artist” is also entirely valid in your view.

Or just don’t. Accept that it was created by the figurehead of a widespread bigoted movement and move on. I read the series over 10 times. Read the 5th 6th and 7th books on release dates when I was a child. I discovered aspects of my identity through the Fandom. It far and away is the series I read as a kid that had the largest impact on me… well there were others that were close but still.

Haven’t touched any of it in half a decade. I never will again either. I’m not invested in the creations of people who cause harm to me and those I love. I have no interest in anything produced by people who would bring mass violent harm against my community. I accept the influence it had on me but I let go of it and moved on. I dont believe that anyone is incapable of that, genuinely. There are other better things out there that weren’t made by fascists.