LadyAutumn

@LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Google Confirms Non-ADB APK Installs Will Require Developer Registration⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Yuuuup. The state and capitalists collude against the working class. Neither one nor the other can ever be trusted to put the interests of workers first, they each will make empty promises to do it. Then they will privilege the ruling class every time.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Microsoft is plugging more holes that let you use Windows 11 without an online account⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I despise that I have to use this OS at work. I would never run windows on my own computer again. Its just insanity. Next they’ll require a credit card to make a Microsoft account.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"Valve must stop making excuses": Steam under fire for "significant price disparity for PC games," causing regional pricing that's "often 20% to 30% higher than the dollar equivalent"⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Makes sense. Crazy what they can get away with.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"Valve must stop making excuses": Steam under fire for "significant price disparity for PC games," causing regional pricing that's "often 20% to 30% higher than the dollar equivalent"⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  The steam sale prices are honestly ridiculous. Barely even discounted. Like 30% off games that are over 5 years old.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I agree that collective action is our strongest pressure against them and it does work.

  I do not think a boycott itself is likely to reverse Apple’s removal of the app. I also think it makes more sense for the app to become available from a web browser, or some other avenue that circumvents the need for Apple’s approval in the first place.

  I also believe that collective action in this circumstance is better spent on ICE itself, which would be more effective (its the reason the US government wants Apple to remove the app in the first place) and more direct to fascist power.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not sure why you’re taking such an aggressive / dismissive tone towards me. Did your comment really warrant a breakdown of possible forms of collective action? It never really seemed you were interested in a nuanced discussion in the first place.

  I think collective action in this circumstance is better spent on directly obstructing ICE operations. The developers of the app would be better served by making their project accessible in browser, and self hosted so as to prevent further attempts to make it inaccessible. Group collective action should be focused on demonstration and obstruction of the root of the problem, ICE itself. How you go about the depends a lot on when/where but there are a lot of ways to obstruct their operations.

  Ive never personally spent money on any kind of Apple device. I would certainly encourage others not to as well, a thing I was already doing. But I think focusing on Apple as the root problem here is a mistake in the first place.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  There are a lot of other ways to apply pressure besides boycotts.

  ?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I dont understand why recommending other forms of collective action makes me cynical.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I wasnt gatekeeping it. Just pointing out how ultimately ineffective it is in creating meaningful change.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Can you show me where I said to do nothing? Or is boycotting the only form of collective action you’re aware of?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, as opposed to spending money at another capitalist institution that will inevitably do the same thing, which is somehow not a subservient take.

  There are a lot of other ways to apply pressure besides boycotts. I dont think a boycott would ever work against Apple over this.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Jimmy Kimmel made Disney a lot of money. They had to choose between pressure from the US government, and losing a popular source of revenue along with the vast amount of liberals who swore them off. Jimmy Kimmel was not a real institutional threat to the US government. So the US government did not have a very strong incentive to continuously push for him being taken down, and Disney had a lot of incentive to keep him around.

  An app that targets fascists makes Apple no money. The US government faces the loss (or rendering ineffective) of their fascist police force. Both sends therefore face a huge amount of pressure to have the app taken down. It would have to be a gigantic part of their profit margin to warrant any pushback from Apple. I’d be very, very surprised to hear that this change is ever overturned through a boycott.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Do you really think this situation is comparable in any way to Jimmy Kimmel? I really don’t. Even if it were, nowhere near that many Apple customers care whether or not the app that targets fascist militias is on the app store or not.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Oh we are way passed the point where “voting with your dollar” means literally anything. These billionaires are making more money than they ever have in human history. They have literally turned all of society across large swaths of the world into a gigantic personal capital generator. It makes literally not a single difference if all of us here boycotted them or not. It’s meaningless.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IT'S A TRAP⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  In the top case has it been arbitrarily decided to include space in between the would-be victims? Or is the top a like number line comparison to the bottom? Because if thats the case it becomes relevant if there is one body for every real number unit of distance. (One body at 0.1 meter, and at 0.01 meter, at 0.001, etc)

  If so then there’s an infinite amount of victims on the first planck length of the bottom track. An infinite number of victims would contain every possible victim. Every single possible person on the first plank length. So on the next planck length would be every possible person again. Which would mean that the bottom track is actually choosing a universe of perpetual endless suffering and death for every single possible person. The top track would eventually cause infinite suffering but it would take forever to get there. The bottom track starts at infinite suffering and extends infinitely in this manner.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨flohmarkt a federated alternative to ebay and facebook marketplace⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I have no clue where Facebook marketplace servers are. That has never been relevant to me. Kijiji is a popular online marketplace in Canada, and it let’s you pick location or have it choose automatically based on your location.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  We are. You keep ignoring the majority of what I say. You also haven’t really pushed back in any way on the majority of what I’ve said. Scientists work with different definitions, right, and so we are talking about sex as it relates to people and how we categorize people. I am asking how we can use a definition of sex based exclusively on gametes in specific situations, specifically to highlight to you that that definition itself is not all that useful when applied to people.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Let me return to your original comment, again.

  No, we only have 2 sexes. Sperm producers and egg producers. We call those male and female. All of the other stuff is window dressing.

  And the comment I was responding to.

  Since I don’t think fungi have a social structure, those are sexes. Humans have two Sexes but also gender expression, conflating those is how transphobes come to their views.

  We have been talking about sex in humans this entire time, a subject you are for some reason determined to avoid? Lol

  You didnt answer if theyre still female after menopause though. They don’t produce gametes. So they no longer meet the stated definition. And would therefore now be sexless. As would any sterile person. This is an inherent limitation of equating sex 1 to 1 with gametes production. Animals and plants couldnt care less what we think about them. Other people however do tend to care how we talk about them. And I doubt anyone, literally anyone, would agree that anyone who is sterile is no longer male or female. This is an example of the way that the definitions of terms can be one thing in one context and another in a different one. When the word sex is used in common parlance it is usually not as a reference to gametes.

  What we are discussing is how to discuss people who are neither male or female. Sex, yes even in the literal Wikipedia definition, defines 2 categories. Not all organisms fit within those 2 categories. Therefore there are more than 2 categories. That is the entirety of my held position.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Your reductive approach to understanding biology is unhelpful in the context of humans. A better statement is “humans only produce 2 gametes”, which is at least accurate. Sex as it exists for people and as it relates to people has really nothing to do with gametes. It is associated with gametes, but is for the most part unrelated to them. The window dressing you mentioned is actually what people generally mean by sex. All of the other things. Even biologists usually mean the window dressing. They dont ask to test subjects gametes before performing studies on them. They accept their stated sex (which is nearly always their assigned sex, and therefore based on external appearance) or what it says on some legal documentation (same as previous) and then accept that assignment.

  The word sex used in the context of human traits just does not refer to gametes. You can define it that way, the same way I might define apples as vegetables, but if that definition is entirely divorced from what the word actually means in every day life then what is the purpose of the definition? It serves no purpose. Humans and mushrooms can hardly be equated, and approaching the concept of sex the same in each case is going to do very little except ostracize intersex people and make society generally inhospitable to them.

  You essentially avoided answering my previous questions here. Are you saying that post menopausal women are no longer female? Just clarifying. I am pretty sure that if that is the case and you stand by that definition then you stand very much alone.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  So you would define them as each as sexless and therefore belonging to the same sex category? I would argue that youve assigned a “third sex” category to them in doing so. If the options are male/female/neither/both, then you’re proposing a system of 4 categories. One which is solely focused on reproductive cells, which is not and never has been the definition of sex in humans.

  You said earlier that all secondary sex characteristics, being secondary characteristics, are “window dressing”. Downstream consequences of reproductive cells. How do we account for this in the example I mentioned in my previous comment? The 2 sterile humans, one assigned female at birth and one assigned male at birth. They have the same “sex category”, neither has any reproductive cells of any kind. They should both have no secondary sex characteristics if that is the case, using your own statements. Why then is that not the case? And more to a direct point, why doesnt their drivers license have a “N/A” next to the “Sex” marker?

  What happens when someone loses their ability to produce reproductive cells? Are cis women going through menopause “formerly female” and therefore now “sterile, sexless”? Are cis men who have had to have their reproductive organs removed “formerly male” and therefore now “sterile, sexless”?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ll now return to your original comment.

  No, we only have 2 sexes. Sperm producers and egg producers. We call those male and female. All of the other stuff is window dressing.

  Some people do not produce a gamete. Some people can produce both. What sex are each of those people? One person is assigned female at birth and another person is assigned male at birth, but they are both sterile and incapable of producing any gametes. Are they the same sex? What sex are they?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Since I don’t think fungi have a social structure, those are sexes. Humans have two Sexes but also gender expression, conflating those is how transphobes come to their views.

  This is the comment I was responding to. Rejecting an organism as sterile offspring does literally nothing to answer what sex that organism is. What sex is the “sterile offspring”?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Also to add to what I said in my other comment, sex as a working definition affects many areas of our lives. You may define sex as the production of gametes, but being male or female affects gigantic areas of our social lives and comes with a massive number of tacked on traits. Far from merely being a definition of biology it affects our experience of every single aspect of society. Sex is all of those things too. We can argue that it shouldn’t be, that it should be an entirely unrelated and inconsequential trait (which would also mean that we can easily recognize that people outside of the binary categories exist), but the reality is it doesn’t mean that.

  Society requires you to have a sex. If you are an intersex person you are functionally incapable of interacting meaningfully with a society that does not recognize people who are neither male or female. For instance, when bathroom bans are passed, where should intersex people go? Where can you go if society has adopted a rigid binary view of sex and you are not male or female? What social services are you entitled to? What prisons should you be put in? Sex in terms of a rigid binary category dichotomy functionally erases the existence of intersex people and adds a huge amount of barriers to their lives.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not conflating them, I am showing that a textbook definition and working definition are not the same thing. Human society functions on working definitions of sex, which are almost universally appearance based. It all comes down to what a doctor sees when you’re born. Thats the functional definition of sex in terms of human society. Thats what sex means to people in day to day life. What your physical body looks like upon visual examination.

  You’ve still refused to answer for the shortcomings of your provided textbook definition. What sex is an organism that produces no gametes? What sex is an organism that produces both? Both of those things are things that can and do happen, to humans as well. Does someone’s sex change once they no longer produce any gametes? Your definition of binary sex must necessarily account for every single one of these cases and still find a way to sort them all into 2 categories without any exceptions.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Gametes are not useful for this definition, not everyone produces any gametes. More to the actual root of the problem, sex is almost never determined by gametes or by chromosomes. Genetics is very rarely the basis by which sex is determined. It is almost exclusively determined by external appearance. Legitimately, almost 100% of the time. In rare circumstances tests are performed to determine intersex status. But for the overwhelming majority of people the only basis by which their sex has ever been determined is by external appearance.

  Gamete production is cool and what not. It is also almost entirely irrelevant to the discussion of intersex people and the precise number of sexes there are. Strictly speaking not all organisms are sortable into the categories of male and female. Thats the reality. To ignore them is to deny reality. To define them as malformed is to dehumanize them. To demand they exist in a binary world ignorant to their experience is to discriminate against them.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  How kind of you to brush all intersex people off as “window dressing”. Also, I guess you dont exist at all if you dont produce eggs or sperms then.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Plants looking at people looking at people looking at fungi⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Humans have more than 2 sexes. Sex is a convenient category based around a phenotype, not a golden rule that all organisms adhere to. People who exist outside those phenotypes are not defective or malformed and do not necessarily require surgeries to ‘correct’ their bodies and make them fall in line with binary sex categories.

  By asserting sex as binary and immutable you are actually doing the legwork of transphobia for transphobes. They also assert that sex is binary and immutable. They deny that anything such thing as gender identity or expression exists in the first place, instead asserting that gendered behavior is a direct product of biology.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨AOL will end dial-up internet service in September, 34 years after it's debut — AOL Shield Browser and AOL Dialer software will be shuttered on the same day⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah. Increasingly reliable satellite internet really killed their bottom line over the last few years.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Brave browser blocks Windows feature that takes screenshots of everything you do on your PC⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Switching to Linux made me like computers again. Switching to Hyprland made me love computers again.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I'm doing my part!⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I think it’s more like a response to the way one of these things is given a disproportionate amount of time and attention. We’re all expected to micromanage every aspect of our lives to diminish our comparatively miniscule impact of personal choice while the state and the ruling class just do whatever the fuck they want actively slaughtering the environment for fun.

  You know what would help me minimize my carbon footprint a lot? Public transportation. A renewable energy grid. Affordable food created along sustainable and environmentally conscious supply chains. Electronics and clothing that is manufactured with long term use, maintenance, and recyclability in mind.

  Those things are all out of my reach to implement. Me properly sorting my recyclables (which i do) is such a minor impact compared with those other things. Any offsetting done by proper recycling is immediately undone the moment i step into a grocery store, having driven there in my car for lack of public transportation, and buy food that was wastefully produced and transported to my grocery store via fossil fuel based energy.

  The majority of our time and energy should be going into fighting back against the state and the ruling class who refuse to structure society around environmental impact, not on almost the almost irrelevant impact of individual workers. We can and should promote recycling, but we can hammer home that point when our whole society isn’t top down engineered with total indifference to the environment.