Olives @olives@qoto.org

By this, I mean, that there might be new posts popping in, and then, the same random post will be popped in for something like the fifth time.

I see the home feed has shifted from just cycling posts from the past... roughly 24 hours to cycling ones from weeks ago onto it too (it used to do this a while ago but most of the posts lately have been cycled from the past roughly 24 hours).

Also, he spent a huge amount of money on it, and everyone ran circles around him when coming up with their own VR things (by him, I mean Zuckerberg).

Here's a product which no one asked for delivered in the driest and most boring manner possible.

The so-called "metaverse", or Facebook's one, was comically bad. The avatars didn't even have legs and it was fairly spartan.

It makes you wish the days when it was just investors hyping up cryptocurrencies or something.

While I'd say that we are now free of "the metaverse" type rhetoric from 2022, unfortunately, I've seen enough bad takes about VR (though fewer) that I had to specifically add that to my post.

One of the worst things about the "AI" products which were launched in 2022 (remember that "AI" is not a new technology) is that we now have to waste a lot of time with stupid takes, and usually the same stupid takes. It's tiresome.

I suppose one of these shills for surveillance / censorship will try to argue that Australia becoming more irrelevant in the tech world (and shrinking the economy) is somehow a "good" thing.

Also, weren't there tech companies moving from the U.K. to France? France has been behaving weirdly lately though.

This time, it seems that a tech company is leaving Australia for Switzerland. Last time, it was one leaving Australia for America.

I'm aware of the anthropologist. He doesn't say anything of interest to be worth including in the science post.

I'm fairly sure he regurgitated a negative stereotype about a minority sexuality, because one of the people he spoke to told him it. There are also a lot of salacious details of people masturbating and I don't think he tells us anything we don't already know.

Reading a paper about fandoms.

When I read something I thought might be interesting, and the person clearly knows far less than I do and is trying to explain the basics to me.

More books for me to read.

They literally wrote a propagandistic document telling people to conflate the two.

There are a few reasons I don't use the term "CSAM" that much.

Other than wanting more specificity, there is the fact that a group which was aggressively promoting the term was also conflating it with porn and wanting to censor that.

Why would I go out of my way to use a term just because a bunch of bad faith people want me to use it?

Also, the way I've seen a few people use the term has been more along the lines of "look at those freaks" (and it can be quite ambiguous) than something used as a new form of terminology.

I don't think that is a useful contribution to the discourse.

"as if it is one amorphous thing"

I've covered this particular issue in greater detail in other posts, so if my coverage of it here seems a bit brief, that is why.

It's less the term itself, and more what makes sense in covering an issue. Here, the term is ambiguous, it is novel, and it tends to collapse context. Perhaps, I could have conveyed that better.

I considered accepting a small expansion of the term in that post but I think the terminology creep has overall been happening in huge bad faith and the well is too dirty.

I think the bigger thing is that there is always a better way to discuss particular issues.