❤️ sex work is work ✊

  • 1 Post
  • 135 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 3rd, 2023

help-circle






  • This kind of confusion illustrated by Telegram users is exactly why it was the right thing to do for privacy when Signal removed support for SMS because it’s not encrypted. People still whine endlessly about it, but most users are not very savvy, and they’ll assume “this app is secure” and gleefully send compromised SMS to each other. All the warnings and UI indicators that parts of the app were less secure (or not at all in the case of SMS) would be ignored by many users, resulting in an effectively more dangerous app. Signal was smart to remove those insecure features entirely.




  • Luke@lemmy.mltoPrivacy@lemmy.mlA tool for concealing writing style using LLM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    This seems like a valuable utility for concealing writing style, though I feel like the provided example fails to illustrate the rest of the stated goal of the project, which is to “prevent biases, ensuring that the content is judged solely on its merits rather than on preconceived notions about the writer” and “enhance objectivity, allowing ideas to be received more universally”.

    The example given is:

    You: This is a demo of TextCloak!!!

    Model: “Hey, I just wanted to share something cool with you guys. Check out this thing called TextCloak - it’s pretty neat!”

    The model here is injecting bias that wasn’t present in the input (claims it is cool and neat) and adds pointlessly gendered words (you guys) and changes the tone drastically (from a more technical tone to a playful social-media style). These kinds of changes and additions are actually increasing the likelihood that a reader will form preconceived notions about the writer. (In this case, the writer ends up sounding socially frivolous and oblivious compared to the already neutral input text.)

    This tool would be significantly more useful if it detected and preserved the tone and informational intent of input text.



  • Yeah, I agree that Vulcans would probably be naturally accepting of varied gender identification and presentation, and of varied sexual orientations. Probably similar to how the majority of the neurodiverse (especially autistic) communities among humans are accepting of gender and sexuality variations.

    It strikes me as highly illogical to insist that anyone else has a better sense of what a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity is than the individual themselves. If they say “I identify with X pronouns” then obviously it is illogical to use Y pronouns when referring to that person. If they say, “I’m attracted to people like this” then it’s illogical to insist that they should instead be attracted to a different subset of people. If they express a preference for Z gender presentation, it’s illogical to insist they should prefer otherwise.

    Gendered expectations are illogical relics of ancient human social structure anyway, so Vulcan society probably wouldn’t have as many of those to begin with, if any at all. Even our emotionally encumbered human cultures in the 21st century are beginning to wonder at how pointlessly gendered things have been for us.

    some may have views that it is illogical to have a romantic relationship without a child

    I don’t see why it would be logical to posit that the potential for creating offspring is a necessary component of relationships. There are all manner of motivations for intimate bonding that have nothing to do with whether biological reproduction occurs. Also, adoption exists.

    Arguably, the very concept of romance being a core component of relationships would be viewed by Vulcans as an illogical and unnecessary condition. I imagine the vast majority of Vulcan society would be aromantic by default.






  • Luke@lemmy.mltoBooks@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    I place the blame squarely on booksellers (mostly Amazon) for this. By refusing to have any sort of consistency or transparency about what kinds of cover content will result in authors being “dungeoned” on their platforms, it essentially forces explicit content to have cover imagery and blurbs that obfuscate the content to such a degree that misunderstandings like this can happen.

    Words like “sweltering”, “sizzling”, “swoonworthy” in combination with “romance” are meant to be a clue that there is sex in the writing, but the cover simply can not be obvious about that without risking the book (and the author’s entire account) being unlisted without communication or recourse.