#antisocial — Public Fediverse posts

So, with Google announcing "Search is going full-AI, we won't be sending traffic to the original sites any more", someone else pointed out that this eradication of the traditional search-engine compact - we let you crawl our sites to create your index, and you send visitors to our sites when relevant - means that we can, and should, block all of Google's crawlers now. If they're going to just take, take, take and give nothing back, why let them access your content at all?

But this is cute. Besides the fact that Google documents that some of their crawlers ignore robots.txt, there's this bit of fun. On this page (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/robots-txt/create-robots-txt), they link to "the Google list of user agents" (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetchers/overview-google-crawlers).

However, that links to 3 separate pages of them, and *each of those pages explicitly states that is not comprehensive, but only the ones they commonly get questions about*. And of course, none of the "User-triggered fetchers" obey robots.txt, along with some others.

So Google isn't even reporting the full list of user-agents that can be used to stop their crawling.

That is some bullshit.

#Google #crawler #RobotsTxt #UserAgent #bullshit #antisocial #web #search #WebSearch #LLM #AI

So, with Google announcing "Search is going full-AI, we won't be sending traffic to the original sites any more", someone else pointed out that this eradication of the traditional search-engine compact - we let you crawl our sites to create your index, and you send visitors to our sites when relevant - means that we can, and should, block all of Google's crawlers now. If they're going to just take, take, take and give nothing back, why let them access your content at all?

But this is cute. Besides the fact that Google documents that some of their crawlers ignore robots.txt, there's this bit of fun. On this page (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/robots-txt/create-robots-txt), they link to "the Google list of user agents" (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetchers/overview-google-crawlers).

However, that links to 3 separate pages of them, and *each of those pages explicitly states that is not comprehensive, but only the ones they commonly get questions about*. And of course, none of the "User-triggered fetchers" obey robots.txt, along with some others.

So Google isn't even reporting the full list of user-agents that can be used to stop their crawling.

That is some bullshit.

#Google #crawler #RobotsTxt #UserAgent #bullshit #antisocial #web #search #WebSearch #LLM #AI

So, with Google announcing "Search is going full-AI, we won't be sending traffic to the original sites any more", someone else pointed out that this eradication of the traditional search-engine compact - we let you crawl our sites to create your index, and you send visitors to our sites when relevant - means that we can, and should, block all of Google's crawlers now. If they're going to just take, take, take and give nothing back, why let them access your content at all?

But this is cute. Besides the fact that Google documents that some of their crawlers ignore robots.txt, there's this bit of fun. On this page (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/robots-txt/create-robots-txt), they link to "the Google list of user agents" (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetchers/overview-google-crawlers).

However, that links to 3 separate pages of them, and *each of those pages explicitly states that is not comprehensive, but only the ones they commonly get questions about*. And of course, none of the "User-triggered fetchers" obey robots.txt, along with some others.

So Google isn't even reporting the full list of user-agents that can be used to stop their crawling.

That is some bullshit.

#Google #crawler #RobotsTxt #UserAgent #bullshit #antisocial #web #search #WebSearch #LLM #AI

So, with Google announcing "Search is going full-AI, we won't be sending traffic to the original sites any more", someone else pointed out that this eradication of the traditional search-engine compact - we let you crawl our sites to create your index, and you send visitors to our sites when relevant - means that we can, and should, block all of Google's crawlers now. If they're going to just take, take, take and give nothing back, why let them access your content at all?

But this is cute. Besides the fact that Google documents that some of their crawlers ignore robots.txt, there's this bit of fun. On this page (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/robots-txt/create-robots-txt), they link to "the Google list of user agents" (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetchers/overview-google-crawlers).

However, that links to 3 separate pages of them, and *each of those pages explicitly states that is not comprehensive, but only the ones they commonly get questions about*. And of course, none of the "User-triggered fetchers" obey robots.txt, along with some others.

So Google isn't even reporting the full list of user-agents that can be used to stop their crawling.

That is some bullshit.

#Google #crawler #RobotsTxt #UserAgent #bullshit #antisocial #web #search #WebSearch #LLM #AI

So, with Google announcing "Search is going full-AI, we won't be sending traffic to the original sites any more", someone else pointed out that this eradication of the traditional search-engine compact - we let you crawl our sites to create your index, and you send visitors to our sites when relevant - means that we can, and should, block all of Google's crawlers now. If they're going to just take, take, take and give nothing back, why let them access your content at all?

But this is cute. Besides the fact that Google documents that some of their crawlers ignore robots.txt, there's this bit of fun. On this page (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/robots-txt/create-robots-txt), they link to "the Google list of user agents" (https://developers.google.com/crawling/docs/crawlers-fetchers/overview-google-crawlers).

However, that links to 3 separate pages of them, and *each of those pages explicitly states that is not comprehensive, but only the ones they commonly get questions about*. And of course, none of the "User-triggered fetchers" obey robots.txt, along with some others.

So Google isn't even reporting the full list of user-agents that can be used to stop their crawling.

That is some bullshit.

#Google #crawler #RobotsTxt #UserAgent #bullshit #antisocial #web #search #WebSearch #LLM #AI

Nothing reminds me why I don't leave the house quite like leaving the house.

---
#IntrovertLife #Homebody #WhyIStayHome #SocialAnxiety #CouchIsMyBestFriend #IndoorKid #RelatableContent #StayHomeClub #AntiSocial #HomeSweetHome

Nothing reminds me why I don't leave the house quite like leaving the house.

---
#IntrovertLife #Homebody #WhyIStayHome #SocialAnxiety #CouchIsMyBestFriend #IndoorKid #RelatableContent #StayHomeClub #AntiSocial #HomeSweetHome

Two crew members from Eurowings in the seats in front of me. They need eight seats for them, their luggage, and various food and drink items, as well as their feet. Such a shame tickets aren't sold according to how many seats people really occupy.

#life #travel #train #Eurowings #AntiSocial

Two crew members from Eurowings in the seats in front of me. They need eight seats for them, their luggage, and various food and drink items, as well as their feet. Such a shame tickets aren't sold according to how many seats people really occupy.

#life #travel #train #Eurowings #AntiSocial

Two crew members from Eurowings in the seats in front of me. They need eight seats for them, their luggage, and various food and drink items, as well as their feet. Such a shame tickets aren't sold according to how many seats people really occupy.

#life #travel #train #Eurowings #AntiSocial

Two crew members from Eurowings in the seats in front of me. They need eight seats for them, their luggage, and various food and drink items, as well as their feet. Such a shame tickets aren't sold according to how many seats people really occupy.

#life #travel #train #Eurowings #AntiSocial

Two crew members from Eurowings in the seats in front of me. They need eight seats for them, their luggage, and various food and drink items, as well as their feet. Such a shame tickets aren't sold according to how many seats people really occupy.

#life #travel #train #Eurowings #AntiSocial

Netizens of the #Fediverse!!! Is it crazy of me to have an expectation that libraries should be quiet places? Am I out of touch for being angry at having to put up with loud dance music blasting inside my local library all morning and into the early afternoon several days a week? 😠😡

#AntiSocial #BrentLibraries #DoNotWant #Fuckery #ItsAMadHouse #NoisePollution

Netizens of the #Fediverse!!! Is it crazy of me to have an expectation that libraries should be quiet places? Am I out of touch for being angry at having to put up with loud dance music blasting inside my local library all morning and into the early afternoon several days a week? 😠😡

#AntiSocial #BrentLibraries #DoNotWant #Fuckery #ItsAMadHouse #NoisePollution

Netizens of the #Fediverse!!! Is it crazy of me to have an expectation that libraries should be quiet places? Am I out of touch for being angry at having to put up with loud dance music blasting inside my local library all morning and into the early afternoon several days a week? 😠😡

#AntiSocial #BrentLibraries #DoNotWant #Fuckery #ItsAMadHouse #NoisePollution

Netizens of the #Fediverse!!! Is it crazy of me to have an expectation that libraries should be quiet places? Am I out of touch for being angry at having to put up with loud dance music blasting inside my local library all morning and into the early afternoon several days a week? 😠😡

#AntiSocial #BrentLibraries #DoNotWant #Fuckery #ItsAMadHouse #NoisePollution

mais trouve de l’argent pour fournir des matraques aux forces de répression.

💢 Ce n’est pas du ressort d’un département, cela relève de sa décision d’affirmer une politique sécuritaire et non sociale.

6/10

#budget #répression #social #antisocial

Sing with me #reverendelvis #music #banjo #allisonkrauss #bluegrass #antisocial

The GOP is a diseased organization, completely antithetical to the nation. It needs to be purged.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/republican-party-nazi-problem-getting-180000669.html

#racist #antiAmerican #antisocial #traitor #GOP #MAGA #nazi #purge #USPolitics #USPol #government

Host: hey did you have an ok time at the party?
Me: Yeah! I had an amazing time.
Host: You just sat in the back, playing with the dogs. Not talking to anyone the entire time !
Me: Like I said, had an amazing time …
#dogsofmastodon #social #antisocial #dogs

Is the fact that there's people eating alone at sit down restaurants at any time of day a reflection of how #antisocial the stupid people of #vancouver are that some people have no one to come meet them for a meal together?

SICK FIX / GARLIC BREATH / ANTI SOCIAL

https://grpunkflyers.notopia.dev/flyers/1328/

Warum man in der heutigen Zeit definitiv #Meta, #Musk und diversen anderen #antisocial #Plattformen den Rücken kehren sollte? Jede Unterstützung dieser #Datenhändler, ist eine #Unterstützung für #Trump und seinen #Sturmtrupp #ice.

Außerdem ist ihr #Algorithmus eine Gefahr für einen echten Austausch. Er schreibt euch vor, was eure Interessen sind und überflutet euch mit unendlichem Müll aus den Weiten des #www.

Anders im #Fediverse, mit #Mastodon, #Friendica, #Pixelfed, etc. Hier bekommt ihr die Inhalte, die euch wirklich interessieren. Ohne Werbung, ohne dass eure Daten verkauft werden. Der Beitritt ist schon lange nicht mehr komplizierter als beispielsweise bei der #Müllhalde #Facebook, auch wenn viele aus dem Bereich des "Qualitätsjournalismus" etwas anderes erzählen wollen. Nicht jeder der Nachrichten für ein Onlineportal schreibt, hat auch Ahnung davon.

Who Gets to Speak On Discord, Who Gets Banned, and Why That’s Always Political in Spaces with No Politics Rules

So, a thing I find very interesting about the fragility of the esteem among chronic Discord users is that it’s common for admins and moderators to ban or make fun of people who leave. Essentially, they’re responding to being rejected or not chosen, so they think it’s reasonable to retaliate

A Discord server I am lurking in has a “no politics” rule and is a religious, esoteric, and philosophical server. What I find very funny about this is that politics is:

“Politics is who gets what, when, and how.”

— Harold D. Lasswell, Politics: Who Gets What, When, How (1936)

I find it very funny that the most minimal form of being “not political” in a virtual community is a Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ). I was part of an IRC chaos magick channel when I was a teenager, and I submitted to a zine under my old handle (which is not Rayn) when I was 20. No, I’m not going to reveal the name I wrote under, which was published in chaos magick zines back in the day, because I’ve had a bucket of crazies following me around since 2008, with the insane network of anarchists circa 2020 being the latest instance.

ChanServ was a bot used on IRC (Internet Relay Chat) networks to manage channel operations such as bans, who got voiced, and permissions. Think of it as an early, early moderation bot. In an IRC TAZ, everyone who entered got all the permissions from Chanserv, so anyone could ban, voice, unban, deop, or op anyone else. No one had more power than anyone else, so there was minimal negotiation over channel resources. A TAZ is still an inherently political construct; however, it is a minimal political construct because there is minimal negotiation of resources and an equal, random, and chaotic authority structure. That’s not Discord, though.

Discord inherently has a hierarchical system defined by roles, a TOS, and members are expected to abide by the rules of that server. So, when you say there is a no-politics rule on Discord, you are inherently contradicting yourself because Discord is structurally political in how you, as a moderator, interact with others. How people negotiate conversations and interact with each other to access the resources of your Discord server is inherently political.

Discord’s structure makes any “no-politics” rule itself a political act. Moderators exercise power by granting, restricting, or revoking permissions, and that distribution of power is the very politics the rule tries to avoid. So while the intention is to keep discussions “apolitical,” it creates local Discord politics by determining who gets to speak and who gets silenced (e.g., banned, timed out, kicked, or limited to certain channels). A “no politics” rule shifts political dynamics into moderation decisions rather than eliminating them.

What prompted this was me observing a typical pragmatic versus moral realism argument that you’d see in any philosophy course or forum. I’m an academic and a computational scientist, but I don’t try to shut down any arguments with that, because that’s an explicit fallacy and a dishonest, bad-faith tactic.

Technically, I am a biologist. Yes, I have a biology degree and a biotech degree. I also have philosophy, mathematics, and computer science and engineering degrees under my belt. I have to work with people like this on a daily basis, and I find them insufferable, so the last thing I want to do in my free time after looking at stacks of dumbass papers is argue with people on Reddit or Discord when I could be fucking, getting fucked, or spending time with my husband. But, alas, they have no life. Keep in mind, as a computational biologist that reviews a lot of shit, I get paid to argue. These idiots are arguing on the Internet for free! The reason why Redditors, Reddit moderators, and Discord moderators get shat on so much is that all of their labor is unpaid! People with lives don’t take it that seriously!

On to the convo:

A new person in the community defined morals as: morals = {a, b, c} exhaustively. An established member of that community responded that, for them, morals are either {x, y, z…}, non-exhaustive and polymorphic, or not inherently defined by the tradition itself but supplied externally by the individual. The new person replied, effectively, “According to my definition of a, b, c, that still constitutes a moral framework.” An established member who is also a scientist pushed back as if no definition of morals had been proposed at all, when in actuality they were disagreeing with the scope and applicability of the given definition, not the act of defining itself.

By the way, the symbolic way I’m defining this is ambiguous. You have no clue what anything is; however, it is ontologically defined, and the logic makes sense. That is the problem. An ontological definition was given, so arguing that no definition was proposed—simply because they disagreed with it—is in bad faith. Personally, I am a constructivist, poststructuralist, pragmatist, instrumentalist, and anti-realist, so I don’t care too much about the realism of the ontological propositions and expressions. I am pointing out logical mistakes.

This is especially egregious when individuals rely on their authority in a domain where their degree is not pertinent. A well-known issue with scientists is that their curiosity can outstrip their morality. Essentially, an ethics board composed mostly of scientists without degrees in ethics, law, or philosophy will make poor decisions and saturate the political sphere they occupy with advocates and lobbyists to bend laws to their interests. Therefore, a board with no philosophers is pretty sinister.

Morals and ethics are philosophical problems. To my knowledge, many people who sit on ethics boards that seriously address ethical issues have philosophy, and not just astronomy, degrees. Relevant degrees include psychology, sociology, theology, philosophy, etc. For example, I have a philosophy degree, so I am technically qualified and credentialed by a university to have these discussions. An astronomy degree alone does not make someone qualified to discuss ethics—maybe if they also had a theology degree?

The thing I find really funny about this group is that they avoid dilemmas. Morals and ethics are developed through ethical dilemmas. Their response to any type of dilemma is to exert their local authority and exclude, deny, or shut down conversations.

The difference between science and philosophy is that science is a little less messy and more defined. We can all see something and agree on what we see, right? The difference with philosophical questions and moral dilemmas is that they are relatively open-ended and ambiguous. It’s really amusing to me how those who try to argue philosophy are uncomfortable with indefinite answers that are open to interpretation.

It’s just funny how they tacitly assume that they are the only academics in their field in existence and that their opinion on things is the consensus, especially on metaphysical issues where there is no consensus. No human knows what the right thing to do is all the time. It’s great to know that they have somehow achieved a level of inhuman perfection.

Who Gets to Speak On Discord, Who Gets Banned, and Why That’s Always Political in Spaces with No Politics Rules

So, a thing I find very interesting about the fragility of the esteem among chronic Discord users is that it’s common for admins and moderators to ban or make fun of people who leave. Essentially, they’re responding to being rejected or not chosen, so they think it’s reasonable to retaliate

A Discord server I am lurking in has a “no politics” rule and is a religious, esoteric, and philosophical server. What I find very funny about this is that politics is:

“Politics is who gets what, when, and how.”

— Harold D. Lasswell, Politics: Who Gets What, When, How (1936)

I find it very funny that the most minimal form of being “not political” in a virtual community is a Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ). I was part of an IRC chaos magick channel when I was a teenager, and I submitted to a zine under my old handle (which is not Rayn) when I was 20. No, I’m not going to reveal the name I wrote under, which was published in chaos magick zines back in the day, because I’ve had a bucket of crazies following me around since 2008, with the insane network of anarchists circa 2020 being the latest instance.

ChanServ was a bot used on IRC (Internet Relay Chat) networks to manage channel operations such as bans, who got voiced, and permissions. Think of it as an early, early moderation bot. In an IRC TAZ, everyone who entered got all the permissions from Chanserv, so anyone could ban, voice, unban, deop, or op anyone else. No one had more power than anyone else, so there was minimal negotiation over channel resources. A TAZ is still an inherently political construct; however, it is a minimal political construct because there is minimal negotiation of resources and an equal, random, and chaotic authority structure. That’s not Discord, though.

Discord inherently has a hierarchical system defined by roles, a TOS, and members are expected to abide by the rules of that server. So, when you say there is a no-politics rule on Discord, you are inherently contradicting yourself because Discord is structurally political in how you, as a moderator, interact with others. How people negotiate conversations and interact with each other to access the resources of your Discord server is inherently political.

Discord’s structure makes any “no-politics” rule itself a political act. Moderators exercise power by granting, restricting, or revoking permissions, and that distribution of power is the very politics the rule tries to avoid. So while the intention is to keep discussions “apolitical,” it creates local Discord politics by determining who gets to speak and who gets silenced (e.g., banned, timed out, kicked, or limited to certain channels). A “no politics” rule shifts political dynamics into moderation decisions rather than eliminating them.

What prompted this was me observing a typical pragmatic versus moral realism argument that you’d see in any philosophy course or forum. I’m an academic and a computational scientist, but I don’t try to shut down any arguments with that, because that’s an explicit fallacy and a dishonest, bad-faith tactic.

Technically, I am a biologist. Yes, I have a biology degree and a biotech degree. I also have philosophy, mathematics, and computer science and engineering degrees under my belt. I have to work with people like this on a daily basis, and I find them insufferable, so the last thing I want to do in my free time after looking at stacks of dumbass papers is argue with people on Reddit or Discord when I could be fucking, getting fucked, or spending time with my husband. But, alas, they have no life. Keep in mind, as a computational biologist that reviews a lot of shit, I get paid to argue. These idiots are arguing on the Internet for free! The reason why Redditors, Reddit moderators, and Discord moderators get shat on so much is that all of their labor is unpaid! People with lives don’t take it that seriously!

On to the convo:

A new person in the community defined morals as: morals = {a, b, c} exhaustively. An established member of that community responded that, for them, morals are either {x, y, z…}, non-exhaustive and polymorphic, or not inherently defined by the tradition itself but supplied externally by the individual. The new person replied, effectively, “According to my definition of a, b, c, that still constitutes a moral framework.” An established member who is also a scientist pushed back as if no definition of morals had been proposed at all, when in actuality they were disagreeing with the scope and applicability of the given definition, not the act of defining itself.

By the way, the symbolic way I’m defining this is ambiguous. You have no clue what anything is; however, it is ontologically defined, and the logic makes sense. That is the problem. An ontological definition was given, so arguing that no definition was proposed—simply because they disagreed with it—is in bad faith. Personally, I am a constructivist, poststructuralist, pragmatist, instrumentalist, and anti-realist, so I don’t care too much about the realism of the ontological propositions and expressions. I am pointing out logical mistakes.

This is especially egregious when individuals rely on their authority in a domain where their degree is not pertinent. A well-known issue with scientists is that their curiosity can outstrip their morality. Essentially, an ethics board composed mostly of scientists without degrees in ethics, law, or philosophy will make poor decisions and saturate the political sphere they occupy with advocates and lobbyists to bend laws to their interests. Therefore, a board with no philosophers is pretty sinister.

Morals and ethics are philosophical problems. To my knowledge, many people who sit on ethics boards that seriously address ethical issues have philosophy, and not just astronomy, degrees. Relevant degrees include psychology, sociology, theology, philosophy, etc. For example, I have a philosophy degree, so I am technically qualified and credentialed by a university to have these discussions. An astronomy degree alone does not make someone qualified to discuss ethics—maybe if they also had a theology degree?

The thing I find really funny about this group is that they avoid dilemmas. Morals and ethics are developed through ethical dilemmas. Their response to any type of dilemma is to exert their local authority and exclude, deny, or shut down conversations.

The difference between science and philosophy is that science is a little less messy and more defined. We can all see something and agree on what we see, right? The difference with philosophical questions and moral dilemmas is that they are relatively open-ended and ambiguous. It’s really amusing to me how those who try to argue philosophy are uncomfortable with indefinite answers that are open to interpretation.

It’s just funny how they tacitly assume that they are the only academics in their field in existence and that their opinion on things is the consensus, especially on metaphysical issues where there is no consensus. No human knows what the right thing to do is all the time. It’s great to know that they have somehow achieved a level of inhuman perfection.

BlueSky Is A Platform For Attention Whores With No Standards

I’m convinced that Bluesky is the platform for attention-whores who perform and humiliate themselves for validation and affirmation. It’s really sad. I don’t feel bad when bad things happen to them as a consequence because they were already warned, yet they prioritize fitting into a culture and refuse to deal with their feelings of inadequacy. The reason they stay is that the bar is low for meaningful engagement, allowing them to indulge in their obsessions and compulsions while being rewarded for self-destructive behavior. It truly is quite pathetic.

I initially joined Bluesky for the sexual content because people on Mastodon have little interest in sex and much more elaborate norms around sexuality. Contrary to what people think of me, I don’t actually use social media in the conventional way most people do. I view it on an abstract, non-algorithmically served layer via my network analysis tools, and I interact with YouTube in a very constrained way. So, I wasn’t aware of how bad things were until I started using Bluesky conventionally. The men on Bluesky are just plain repulsive to me. Desperation, neediness, lack of independence, and obsessively posting about a single topic (like sex, religion, or politics), instead of developing a genuine hobby that demonstrates skill, progress, and mastery, are major turn-offs. I find a lack of standards absolutely disgusting.

For example, if someone abhorrent gives you a compliment, you don’t accept it. If an abhorrent person follows you, you block them. Yet what I see are men posting sexual content and seeking attention and validation from anyone, regardless of who it’s coming from. If I look through someone’s activity and see nothing but low-effort posts interacting with nothing but sexual content or obsessive engagement with that type of content, I lose interest immediately.

A reason why my husband has held my attention for over a decade is that there is always something new with him. He is always randomly looking into developing a new skill. One day, he started randomly speaking Mandarin to me, which I did not know he knew how to speak. He had told me he had been learning Mandarin. Yes, my husband is neurodivergent and his interests are cars, but that doesn’t displace all other things. Another reason why my husband holds my attention is that he can keep a conversation going and match anyone’s changes. It’s not one ritualistic or compulsive thing every single fucking day.

A very real consequence of the lack of standards in gay sexual spaces, especially given that many misogynistic, homophobic far-right men suppress their homosexual attractions, is that many of the fetishes in gay sexual spaces are reminiscent of manosphere content. Because of what I do for a living, I have access to audience segmentation metrics and social embeddings of how content is served. Manosphere content clusters with homoerotic content that men consume. At some point, obsession became so normalized that people stopped realizing it was problematic.

Unless gay men set boundaries and tell manosphere bros, “we’re not having that,” you’ll see what I see on Bluesky. I’m actually very sexual myself, and I frequently go to bathhouses—those that have very explicit rules—sex parties, and orgies.

The funny thing is that I have had plenty of really deep philosophical conversations sitting in the hot tub of a bathhouse with naked gay men. Because of health codes and all that, you can’t do sexual things in the pool or the hot tub, so those areas were places for genuine play and conversation, while spots like the saunas were the fuck spots. I recall a particularly interesting conversation I had with an older gay man who had been going to that bathhouse since the ’80s. He explained to me the social context of the HIV epidemic and how, basically, no one knew it was sexually transmitted, so everyone was still barebacking at that exact same bathhouse we were in.

The issue here is people who fuck and sexually perform for awful people who want to murder them because they have absolutely no fucking standards and are so emotionally needy that they forgo all forms of self-preservation. I’m a computer scientist, so I have access to a lot of data tools. I can tell you for a fact that there is a strong correlation between men who want to murder gay men and trans people and the ones liking, engaging in parasocial dynamics with, and commenting in their replies. You’re willing to take sexual attention from people who want to kill you, and that blows my mind.

In their minds, Bluesky is better if it is not a Nazi strip bar but a Nazi BDSM-furry-kink club? What the ever-loving fuck?! Honestly, I watch a lot of feminist content that rips manosphere content apart, so much so that I can instantly recognize coded things. The “fuck no!” moment for me is when I saw manosphere-coded things being fetishized in the ego networks of large gay adult content creators and OnlyFans creators in social network embeddings. It’s not like it is insidious. If I see it, everyone else sees it; they are just ignoring it because they are prioritizing sexual validation and their obsessions.

BlueSky Is A Platform For Attention Whores With No Standards

I’m convinced that Bluesky is the platform for attention-whores who perform and humiliate themselves for validation and affirmation. It’s really sad. I don’t feel bad when bad things happen to them as a consequence because they were already warned, yet they prioritize fitting into a culture and refuse to deal with their feelings of inadequacy. The reason they stay is that the bar is low for meaningful engagement, allowing them to indulge in their obsessions and compulsions while being rewarded for self-destructive behavior. It truly is quite pathetic.

I initially joined Bluesky for the sexual content because people on Mastodon have little interest in sex and much more elaborate norms around sexuality. Contrary to what people think of me, I don’t actually use social media in the conventional way most people do. I view it on an abstract, non-algorithmically served layer via my network analysis tools, and I interact with YouTube in a very constrained way. So, I wasn’t aware of how bad things were until I started using Bluesky conventionally. The men on Bluesky are just plain repulsive to me. Desperation, neediness, lack of independence, and obsessively posting about a single topic (like sex, religion, or politics), instead of developing a genuine hobby that demonstrates skill, progress, and mastery, are major turn-offs. I find a lack of standards absolutely disgusting.

For example, if someone abhorrent gives you a compliment, you don’t accept it. If an abhorrent person follows you, you block them. Yet what I see are men posting sexual content and seeking attention and validation from anyone, regardless of who it’s coming from. If I look through someone’s activity and see nothing but low-effort posts interacting with nothing but sexual content or obsessive engagement with that type of content, I lose interest immediately.

A reason why my husband has held my attention for over a decade is that there is always something new with him. He is always randomly looking into developing a new skill. One day, he started randomly speaking Mandarin to me, which I did not know he knew how to speak. He had told me he had been learning Mandarin. Yes, my husband is neurodivergent and his interests are cars, but that doesn’t displace all other things. Another reason why my husband holds my attention is that he can keep a conversation going and match anyone’s changes. It’s not one ritualistic or compulsive thing every single fucking day.

A very real consequence of the lack of standards in gay sexual spaces, especially given that many misogynistic, homophobic far-right men suppress their homosexual attractions, is that many of the fetishes in gay sexual spaces are reminiscent of manosphere content. Because of what I do for a living, I have access to audience segmentation metrics and social embeddings of how content is served. Manosphere content clusters with homoerotic content that men consume. At some point, obsession became so normalized that people stopped realizing it was problematic.

Unless gay men set boundaries and tell manosphere bros, “we’re not having that,” you’ll see what I see on Bluesky. I’m actually very sexual myself, and I frequently go to bathhouses—those that have very explicit rules—sex parties, and orgies.

The funny thing is that I have had plenty of really deep philosophical conversations sitting in the hot tub of a bathhouse with naked gay men. Because of health codes and all that, you can’t do sexual things in the pool or the hot tub, so those areas were places for genuine play and conversation, while spots like the saunas were the fuck spots. I recall a particularly interesting conversation I had with an older gay man who had been going to that bathhouse since the ’80s. He explained to me the social context of the HIV epidemic and how, basically, no one knew it was sexually transmitted, so everyone was still barebacking at that exact same bathhouse we were in.

The issue here is people who fuck and sexually perform for awful people who want to murder them because they have absolutely no fucking standards and are so emotionally needy that they forgo all forms of self-preservation. I’m a computer scientist, so I have access to a lot of data tools. I can tell you for a fact that there is a strong correlation between men who want to murder gay men and trans people and the ones liking, engaging in parasocial dynamics with, and commenting in their replies. You’re willing to take sexual attention from people who want to kill you, and that blows my mind.

In their minds, Bluesky is better if it is not a Nazi strip bar but a Nazi BDSM-furry-kink club? What the ever-loving fuck?! Honestly, I watch a lot of feminist content that rips manosphere content apart, so much so that I can instantly recognize coded things. The “fuck no!” moment for me is when I saw manosphere-coded things being fetishized in the ego networks of large gay adult content creators and OnlyFans creators in social network embeddings. It’s not like it is insidious. If I see it, everyone else sees it; they are just ignoring it because they are prioritizing sexual validation and their obsessions.

Surprising facts [1] about animals, part 1375:

The white-tailed jackrabbit, which is actually a species of hare also known as the prairie hare or "white jack", or simply "jack", in groups is capable of #geometry. It owes this to the fact that hares are territorial and not social.

When multiple jacks are present at a round bowl, a group of 2 will always arrange itself at 180 degree spacing, 3 at 120 degree spacing, and 4 at 90 degree spacing. I don't have a bowl big enough to see if the pattern holds true for groups of 5 or more.

It's pretty neat!

[1] For small values of "fact".

#jackrabbit #hare #wildlife #Canada #Saskatchewan #prairie #SK #WhiteTailedJackrabbit #RabbitsOfMastodon #rabbit #territorial #antisocial

Surprising facts [1] about animals, part 1375:

The white-tailed jackrabbit, which is actually a species of hare also known as the prairie hare or "white jack", or simply "jack", in groups is capable of #geometry. It owes this to the fact that hares are territorial and not social.

When multiple jacks are present at a round bowl, a group of 2 will always arrange itself at 180 degree spacing, 3 at 120 degree spacing, and 4 at 90 degree spacing. I don't have a bowl big enough to see if the pattern holds true for groups of 5 or more.

It's pretty neat!

[1] For small values of "fact".

#jackrabbit #hare #wildlife #Canada #Saskatchewan #prairie #SK #WhiteTailedJackrabbit #RabbitsOfMastodon #rabbit #territorial #antisocial

Surprising facts [1] about animals, part 1375:

The white-tailed jackrabbit, which is actually a species of hare also known as the prairie hare or "white jack", or simply "jack", in groups is capable of #geometry. It owes this to the fact that hares are territorial and not social.

When multiple jacks are present at a round bowl, a group of 2 will always arrange itself at 180 degree spacing, 3 at 120 degree spacing, and 4 at 90 degree spacing. I don't have a bowl big enough to see if the pattern holds true for groups of 5 or more.

It's pretty neat!

[1] For small values of "fact".

#jackrabbit #hare #wildlife #Canada #Saskatchewan #prairie #SK #WhiteTailedJackrabbit #RabbitsOfMastodon #rabbit #territorial #antisocial

Surprising facts [1] about animals, part 1375:

The white-tailed jackrabbit, which is actually a species of hare also known as the prairie hare or "white jack", or simply "jack", in groups is capable of #geometry. It owes this to the fact that hares are territorial and not social.

When multiple jacks are present at a round bowl, a group of 2 will always arrange itself at 180 degree spacing, 3 at 120 degree spacing, and 4 at 90 degree spacing. I don't have a bowl big enough to see if the pattern holds true for groups of 5 or more.

It's pretty neat!

[1] For small values of "fact".

#jackrabbit #hare #wildlife #Canada #Saskatchewan #prairie #SK #WhiteTailedJackrabbit #RabbitsOfMastodon #rabbit #territorial #antisocial

Surprising facts [1] about animals, part 1375:

The white-tailed jackrabbit, which is actually a species of hare also known as the prairie hare or "white jack", or simply "jack", in groups is capable of #geometry. It owes this to the fact that hares are territorial and not social.

When multiple jacks are present at a round bowl, a group of 2 will always arrange itself at 180 degree spacing, 3 at 120 degree spacing, and 4 at 90 degree spacing. I don't have a bowl big enough to see if the pattern holds true for groups of 5 or more.

It's pretty neat!

[1] For small values of "fact".

#jackrabbit #hare #wildlife #Canada #Saskatchewan #prairie #SK #WhiteTailedJackrabbit #RabbitsOfMastodon #rabbit #territorial #antisocial

Bored fossil fuel enthusiasts are burning rubber, microplastics and toxic chemicals on the Mid North Coast.
#Cars #CarMinds #PetroMasculinity #pollution #noise #toxins #stormwater #BellingerRiver #roads #SchoolHolidays #climate #Bellingen #CoffsHarbour #MidNorthCoast #governance #antisocial #UnsafeBehaviour

Bored fossil fuel enthusiasts are burning rubber, microplastics and toxic chemicals on the Mid North Coast.
#Cars #CarMinds #PetroMasculinity #pollution #noise #toxins #stormwater #BellingerRiver #roads #SchoolHolidays #climate #Bellingen #CoffsHarbour #MidNorthCoast #governance #antisocial #UnsafeBehaviour

Bored fossil fuel enthusiasts are burning rubber, microplastics and toxic chemicals on the Mid North Coast.
#Cars #CarMinds #PetroMasculinity #pollution #noise #toxins #stormwater #BellingerRiver #roads #SchoolHolidays #climate #Bellingen #CoffsHarbour #MidNorthCoast #governance #antisocial #UnsafeBehaviour

Bored fossil fuel enthusiasts are burning rubber, microplastics and toxic chemicals on the Mid North Coast.
#Cars #CarMinds #PetroMasculinity #pollution #noise #toxins #stormwater #BellingerRiver #roads #SchoolHolidays #climate #Bellingen #CoffsHarbour #MidNorthCoast #governance #antisocial #UnsafeBehaviour

Bored fossil fuel enthusiasts are burning rubber, microplastics and toxic chemicals on the Mid North Coast.
#Cars #CarMinds #PetroMasculinity #pollution #noise #toxins #stormwater #BellingerRiver #roads #SchoolHolidays #climate #Bellingen #CoffsHarbour #MidNorthCoast #governance #antisocial #UnsafeBehaviour

La perversion du pouvoir : pourquoi les puissants ne connaissent pas la honte - Élucid https://elucid.media/democratie/la-perversion-du-pouvoir-pourquoi-les-puissants-ne-connaissent-pas-la-honte #politique #psychologie #pathologie #honte #antisocial #psychopathie #pouvoir

"Wait! There's been an update. 'Thou shalt not play thy music out loud on the bus.' "

Image: Deut. IV -- Hans Holbein the Younger -- Woodcut -- Harvard Art Museums -- Object Number M6320

#EverydayAnnoyances #PublicTransport #MassTransit #Bus #Antisocial #Moses #Holbein #Woodcut #Print #Art #HarvardArtMuseums

"Wait! There's been an update. 'Thou shalt not play thy music out loud on the bus.' "

Image: Deut. IV -- Hans Holbein the Younger -- Woodcut -- Harvard Art Museums -- Object Number M6320

#EverydayAnnoyances #PublicTransport #MassTransit #Bus #Antisocial #Moses #Holbein #Woodcut #Print #Art #HarvardArtMuseums

"Wait! There's been an update. 'Thou shalt not play thy music out loud on the bus.' "

Image: Deut. IV -- Hans Holbein the Younger -- Woodcut -- Harvard Art Museums -- Object Number M6320

#EverydayAnnoyances #PublicTransport #MassTransit #Bus #Antisocial #Moses #Holbein #Woodcut #Print #Art #HarvardArtMuseums

"Wait! There's been an update. 'Thou shalt not play thy music out loud on the bus.' "

Image: Deut. IV -- Hans Holbein the Younger -- Woodcut -- Harvard Art Museums -- Object Number M6320

#EverydayAnnoyances #PublicTransport #MassTransit #Bus #Antisocial #Moses #Holbein #Woodcut #Print #Art #HarvardArtMuseums

"Wait! There's been an update. 'Thou shalt not play thy music out loud on the bus.' "

Image: Deut. IV -- Hans Holbein the Younger -- Woodcut -- Harvard Art Museums -- Object Number M6320

#EverydayAnnoyances #PublicTransport #MassTransit #Bus #Antisocial #Moses #Holbein #Woodcut #Print #Art #HarvardArtMuseums

Perhaps the most concerning part of the current changes to the social and antisocial media landscape is how a large part of those who do get it still settle for ”twitter bad” (or in best case ”facebook also bad”), and then move to some other practically centralized, privately owned, service (or stay on instagram).

That said, gradual growth is probably best for the #fediverse. We can only help reprogram the bad habits out of so many former #antisocial media platforms users at the time.

Antisocial ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkfneY5nD_8&list=RDUkfneY5nD_8&start_radio=1

#wintermuteBBSRadioShow
#metal
#anthrax
#antisocial
#unplugged

"FUCK THE POOR!"

https://piefed.social/c/historymemes/p/1522775/fuck-the-poor

"FUCK THE POOR!"