Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
I find it quite strange that even though Tumblr is known as The Neurodivergence Website, a lot of people on here seem to assume that they're the only neurodivergent person on here, and/or that they're the only person on here who understands The Neurodivergent Experience, so they're quite eager to assume that every post on here was written by someone who's neurotypical and needs to be lectured on The Neurodivergent Experience
for those like me who cannot install alternative android forks on their phone because the phone in question is thoroughly unrootable, I would recommend downloading anyapk on your phone while you still can. In their own words:
anyapk is a lightweight Android application installer that bypasses Google's developer verification requirements by using local ADB (Android Debug Bridge) connections. Smoothly install any APK file on your device without restrictions, gatekeepers, or corporate approval.
If you're reading this after Google's lockdown date and are unable to install anyapk the regular way, there is a method outlined on the github linked above which tells you how to install anyapk on your phone by plugging it into a computer with ADB installed on it. Once you have anyapk on your phone, you will not have to do that ever again (unless you delete anyapk off your phone)
[Description for the second image: a post from jrepin that reads:
"Sideloading" is the rentseeker word for "being able to run software of your choosing on a computing device you purchased". There is no reasonable case for an operating system developer having a say over what programs you run on your hardware.
--Eugen Rochko of Mastodon https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/115093185284473606]
#the fact that 'can prove access to an online account at least 12 years old' or even 'account to be verified is itself fully 18 years old'#AREN'T accepted methods of age verification is such a telling sign of what the real purpose of age-gating laws is:#data harvesting and deanonymization and the buildout of state-controllable ways to restrict both content and internet access itself en masse (via @shinelikethunder )
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
i stopped giving a shit about "legit" purchases of digital products after i spent $80 on the entire Dark Horse collection of Trigun/Trigun Maximum ebook mangas, learning that I only got access to reading them through a proprietary website ereader function, couldn't download them, and couldn't get a refund, and then literally only a year later, getting an e-mail stating that Dark Horse was shutting down that part of their company and I wouldn't even be able to read them anymore. Fuck that
Pirate shit. Don't feel bad for it. It's not "your fault" that artists, independent or otherwise, can't make a living. You downloading an album or ebook for free isn't the cause of the problem. The cause is capitalism, plain and simple, and pirating is a lucky loophole that will companies are still trying to stomp out.
the person who helped today when I fell out of my wheelchair actually did a really great job, so I want to share in case other people wonder what to do. [Note: this is not universal, this is merely a suggestion from one person, every wheelchair user's needs are different! I am a person who uses a manual chair usually pushed by someone else who is also disabled.]
Scenario: you see someone in a wheelchair fall out of their chair, and you have the ability to help.
1. Approach and ask "are you okay?"*
2. Next question if they say no, are vague, or open to continuing conversation** is, "is there anything I can do to help?" Or "what can I do?"
If they say no to help, then that's the end, just leave and go do whatever you were doing!
If they ask for help or say they are mildly injured, ask "what would you like me to do?" And wait for an answer before doing anything! If they seem dazed or confused, they might have hit their head or had another medical event*, or they might just be like that due to regular disability. Be patient.
Do not touch the person unless they say to, or they are like, unconcious in the middle of the road, ya know?? Wheelchair users usually have conditions that mean being handled improperly can severely injure us, you could cause much more damage than the fall.
Some things they might need you to do:
Bring their wheelchair closer (mine went about 5 feet away after it dumped me)
engage the brakes of the wheelchair
hold wheelchair steady if it's an unsteady surface (mud, hill, ramp, wet, etc)
offer an arm for them to hold onto to get up (them grabbing you, not you grabbing them) or move another solid item closer for them to use (i.e. a chair) [only do this if you physically have the ability to!]
If the terrain is rough (i.e. a parking lot), they *might* ask you to push their chair to a more stable area once they are back in their chair
nothing
Something else
Do what they ask, NOT what you think would be helpful. If for some reason you have to do something (i.e. you can't stop oncoming traffic and need to get them out) ASAP, tell them what you plan to do
Keep in mind they might also be D/deaf, have a communication disability, be stunned after the fall, have a head injury, not trust other people, etc. Be patient and treat them as a person with autonomy and agency! They might need to just sit on the ground for a few minutes to recover before trying to get back in their chair. They might want everyone to leave them alone. They might ask you to call someone specific. Their chair might have broken and that can be extremely distressing. All of this is like if your legs spontaneously stop working when you're out and about!
A lot of wheelchair users (NOT ALL) have ways to get into their chair on their own once the chair is close enough and brakes engaged (but it's hard from the ground!). Here's what brakes look like on a lot of manual wheelchairs, in case they ask you to lock the brakes. They're levers on each side and pushing the lever pushes a bar against the wheel to hold it still.
ID: A manual wheelchair with the brake levels circled in red and labeled "user brake levers"
*There is also the possibility of course that a person fell out of their chair due to a seizure or other medical event, so that is why it is important to ask if they are okay. If you saw them hit their head, tell them so. If they had a medical event, follow protocol for that, I'm not gonna get into it here (thought I could).
**sometimes a person will be clear after the first question i.e. "I'm all good thanks" clearly means they do not need you to ask another question, you can just leave them alone. Keep walking and don't stare. A lot of the time people will be a bit banged up but be totally fine and able to manage on their own.
TLDR: Ask the wheelchair user if they're okay, then what they need, and then do exactly that, including leaving them alone. Thanks!
[ID: A reply reading, "It's worth noting that unless someone is in immediate danger (on a road, near a chemical spill) there's basically no justification to move a unresponsive person on the ground, basic first aid will tell you that your objective is to stabilize and support until actual trained professionals arrive. Even outside of the context of pre-existing disability and being mishandled, if someone has a brand new neck injury you could seriously, permanently harm them by causing undue stress on the spine. You should always assume an unresponsive person on the ground has internal injuries you can't account for, and unless they're about to get smushed or asphyxiate on vomit leave them where you found them and call an ambulance." End ID]
all right guys, letâs have a conversation about soulmates
because Iâm a nerd who majored in ancient China and still canât let it go
okay so we all know that wangxian invented romance, but letâs talk a bit more about the iconic dialogue in episode 25:
Lan Wangji: ä˝ ććçśćäťéşźäşş? / What kind of person do you take me for?
Wei Wuxian: ććžçśćä˝ çśĺćç˘ççĽĺˇą / I had once thought that, in my lifetime, you would be the one who knew me.
Lan Wangji: çžĺ¨äťćŻ / I still am.
Iâve seen various translations of the phrase âç˘ççĽĺˇąâ as âlifelong confidanteâ or âsoulmate,â and Iâm always so torn because these are both fine translations but like, not quite there
The cops very clearly planted evidence on him because they had to make an arrest because all eyes were on them and whoever actually did the deed was making them look stupid.
Why would the real killer hero have kept the weapon on his person and traveled two states over while carrying it and a manifesto in his bag, conveniently turning the crime into a federal matter? The same guy whose bag they found in a park, filled with monopoly money? Why did the police turn off their bodycams, take Luigi's stuff, drive a block away, turn their bodycams back on, go back into the restaurant, and then arrest him?
From the moment of his arrest, even left-of-center media has been presuming his guilt without examining anything (e.g. calling him "the killer" instead of "alleged" or "accused") and then when I say he didn't do it, the nearest person chimes in with some quip that tells me they think he did do it but should go free anyway. Don't get me wrong, I would have the same attitude if he had done it. But he didn't. It makes me feel like the only sane person in the world, even among my staunchly leftist friends.
All of that, and also I've seen pictures of Luigi and the security camera pics of the suspect, and that's not the same guy. Logic tells me Luigi didn't do it, and also my fucking eyes tell me it wasn't him.
Text of tweet under the cut because it is loooong.
But... Stochastic Parrots.
Timnit Gebru was fired from Google in December 2020 for refusing to retract a research paper, and every single warning that paper made about large language models has now happened at a scale the industry spent 4 years trying to make people forget about.
Her name is Timnit Gebru.
She co-led the Ethical AI team at Google. She co-wrote a paper called "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots" with Emily Bender at the University of Washington and two other researchers. The paper was 14 pages long. It was submitted to a top AI ethics conference. And it was the reason Google decided that one of the most senior Black women in AI research could no longer work there.
The story Google told publicly was that she resigned. The story she told, confirmed by 2,695 of her colleagues in an open letter, was that she was fired by email while on vacation because she refused to either retract the paper or remove her name from it.
The paper had not even been published yet.
Here is what she actually wrote, and why every prediction inside it has now come true.
The first warning was about scale itself. Bender and Gebru argued that training ever-larger models on ever-larger scrapes of the internet would produce systems that appeared fluent but had no actual understanding of language. They called these systems stochastic parrots because they would repeat patterns from training data with statistical confidence and zero comprehension. The paper predicted that this apparent intelligence would fool both users and developers into trusting outputs that were structurally incapable of being reliable.
This was 2020. GPT-3 had just come out. The paper predicted the hallucination problem before anyone had a word for it.
The second warning was about bias amplification. The paper documented in detail that internet-scale training data contains systematic overrepresentation of dominant viewpoints and underrepresentation of marginalized ones. The models would not just absorb this bias. They would amplify it, because the optimization process rewards confident outputs, and confidence in language patterns tracks frequency in the training set.
The prediction was that hiring tools built on these models would discriminate against women. That healthcare triage tools would underperform on Black patients. That loan approval systems would entrench inequality while presenting their decisions as neutral algorithmic judgment.
Every one of those things has now been documented in deployment.
Amazon's hiring algorithm penalized resumes that contained the word "women" in any context. Healthcare risk scoring algorithms used by major US hospitals were found to systematically underestimate the medical needs of Black patients. Apple Card's credit algorithm gave wives credit lines 10x lower than their husbands for the same financial profile.
The third warning was about environmental cost. The paper calculated that training a single large language model produced emissions equivalent to the lifetime output of 5 cars. The prediction was that the race to scale would create an environmental footprint that would eventually rival entire industries.
In 2024, Google's emissions were up 48% from 2019, and the company explicitly blamed AI infrastructure. Microsoft's were up 29%, same reason. Both companies have now quietly abandoned the climate commitments they were publicly celebrating the year Gebru was fired.
The fourth warning was about documentation. The paper argued that the training datasets being assembled were too large for anyone to actually audit. Nobody at Google, OpenAI, Meta, or any other lab could tell you with confidence what was in the data their models were trained on. This was not a temporary problem to be solved later. It was a permanent feature of the approach.
In 2023, researchers discovered that the LAION-5B dataset, used to train Stable Diffusion and other major image models, contained thousands of images of child sexual abuse material. The companies that had trained on the dataset had no way of knowing. The paper predicted that category of failure 3 years before it was found.
The fifth warning was the one Google cared about most.
Bender and Gebru argued that the deployment of these systems would centralize linguistic and cultural power in the hands of the small number of companies that could afford to train them. The internet would become a place where the dominant voice was a statistical average of dominant voices, presented as a neutral assistant. Languages underrepresented in the training data would degrade over time as more web content was generated by these systems and fed back into the next training run.
This is now happening in real time. A 2024 study found that 57% of new web content in English is AI-generated or AI-assisted. Researchers studying low-resource languages have documented active degradation in translation quality, because the synthetic content fed back into training is itself worse in those languages.
The paper Google fired her for predicted the model collapse problem before model collapse had a name.
The mechanism behind why this all happened is the part of her work that nobody quotes.
Gebru's argument was not that AI is dangerous in some abstract sci-fi sense. Her argument was that AI is dangerous in a very specific structural sense. The technology was being built by a small group of researchers who shared similar backgrounds, worked at similar companies, and were rewarded for shipping products faster than competitors. The incentive structure made it impossible for safety, ethics, and bias concerns to slow anything down. Anyone inside the system who raised those concerns was either ignored, sidelined, or removed.
She was making that argument from inside Google.
Then Google proved her right by removing her.
The team Google had built to make sure their AI was safe was dismantled in 90 days because they did the job they had been hired to do. Margaret Mitchell, the other co-lead of the Ethical AI team, was fired two months after Gebru for searching through her own emails for evidence of how Gebru had been treated.
Gebru did not stop. She founded DAIR, the Distributed AI Research Institute, in 2021. The mission is to do AI research outside the control of the companies that have a financial interest in not hearing the answers.
Every prediction in the Stochastic Parrots paper has now been validated by deployment. Hallucinations are an industry-wide problem the largest labs cannot solve. Bias amplification has been documented in hiring, healthcare, lending, and criminal justice. Environmental costs are larger than entire small countries. Training data audits remain impossible. Model collapse is an active research crisis at every major lab.
The question worth sitting with is the one almost no one in the industry will say out loud.
Every researcher with the technical credibility to call out these problems watched what happened to her in December 2020 and made a calculation about their own career. The number of people willing to speak publicly about safety and ethics issues inside the major AI labs collapsed after that firing and has not recovered.
The researcher Google fired for warning about exactly what is now happening was right.
The company that fired her is now the second-largest deployer of the technology she warned about.
And the people inside that company who agree with her are not allowed to say so.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
can you imagine what it will be like the day it finally happens. no one will be posting about anything else. category 10 posting event. if it happens because of someone else their gofundme page will reach over $500,000 within a day. #hopecore
âThe Kent State shootings (also known as the May 4 massacre or the Kent State massacre)[3][4][5] were the shootings on May 4, 1970 of unarmed college students by members of the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University in Kent, Ohio during a mass protest against the bombing of Cambodia by United States military forces. Twenty-eight guardsmen fired approximately 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.[6][7]â
âThere was a significant national response to the shootings: hundreds of universities, colleges, and high schools closed throughout the United States due to a student strike of 4 million students,[10] and the event further affected public opinion, at an already socially contentious time, over the role of the United States in the Vietnam War.[11]â
Student strike of 4 million students! Letâs do that again lol
But it was not just Kent State, eleven days later Mississippi Police fired 150 rounds into a dormitory at Jackson State College, killing 2 and wounding 15 black protesters.
I feel like it needs to be pointed out that to this day, nobody knows exactly what happened.
I donât say that to absolve the National Guard, either. I say it because if you read about the minutes leading up to the shooting, it is extremely obvious the ONG was an absolute fucking mess. Orders were not being passed along correctly, unclear and contradictory orders were being given. At least part of what happened next was due to individual members of the Guard being agitated and on edge due to having no fucking idea what was going on or whether there was danger from armed students.
Itâs important to know this because itâs important to understand what a breakdown in communication and discipline looks like on a military level, especially as we move into an era where military presence can be expected to increase at protests and demonstrations. I donât know how different 4 May 1970 would have looked if the Guard had received clear and consistent orders. I do think it would have looked different, though. I think thereâs a possibility nobody would have died. There were students who were out of order, yes (rocks can be considered lethal weapons, thereâs a reason stoning to death is a thing), but not one of them deserved to pay for it with their lives.
If youâre going to protest in the face of the military, know what a breakdown looks like. Itâs important.
Kent State was literally in our textbooks. That picture was literally in our textbooks.
At a certain point you have to stop drawing sexy naruto or whatever and pay attention, and then when you graduate, you should probably keep learning about stuff.
Like the Beslan School Massacre.
The roots of Putinism were already evident after the massacre of 334 people in a school in Russia in 2004.
That photo of the Kent State shooting is super famous. Most textbooks discussing the 60s include it, any deeper coverage of the 60s or the counterculture of the period discusses it, it is still frequently referenced and talked about, part of the reason the Kent State âgun girlâ is in such bad taste is that she was doing all that on a campus where students had been very famously gunned down within living memory and that was brought up at the time, Crosby Stills & Nash have a goddamn song about it
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
The Electoral College is baked into our Constitution and thus predates the abolition of slavery.
It was the solution to the problem of, "how do we hold timely elections in a vast region (much of it wilderness) without radio, telephones, or Internet?" Well, you send representatives to the capitol! Each representative is supposed to vote on behalf of the people back home, the way they want.
Congress is very, very unlikely to abolish the Electoral College. It'd take a constitutional amendment, and that takes a 2/3 majority of both parts of Congress.
The simple fix is "unfreeze the size of the House." Representatives used to be at 1 per 30,000 people; later, 1 per 50,000. In 1929, they were frozen based on the population in the 1910 census. Right now, it's 1 rep per 750,000+ people... except in states smaller than that, where it's 1 per state. (WY, VT, AK)
How expansion of the House of Representatives could work â and why it would benefit democracy
If the House of Reps has 1 rep per 50,000 people (or, hell, 100,000) - your representative would have a much better chance of representing YOU. Or your city or district.
And the resulting House would be big enough that it wouldn't all split on R-vs-D lines - there would be factions, and groups allied over different sets of interests, and room for the occasional third party Representative.
This would not fix the Electoral college; the fix for that is Popular Vote Interstate Compact, where states agree to put all their electoral votes towards whoever wins the popular vote - if states worth more than 270 votes sign on, it assigns the win to whoever won the popular vote. (They're at 18 states + DC, with 222 electoral votes.)
State status: AK AL AR AZ CA CO CT DC DE FL GA HI IA ID IL IN KS KY LA MA MD ME MI MN MO MS MT NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR PA RI SC SD
The other fix is: One adult citizen, one vote, no excuses. No more removing prisoners' right to vote and allowing former slave states to have a huge "counts towards representatives" population that can't vote.
The electoral college itself, as a concept, is not horribly biased. It skews toward smaller states - but that'd be mostly eradicated if they rebalanced the House, and especially if states didn't have the right disenfranchise people they don't want voting.
2087
baratheonpilled
blakekathryn
izzy806
germansingergirl
