unwilling to fall

And truly what do they mean it was in public? Does that mean that the upskirt photos people take on subways dont count because other people are around? OF COURSE IT WAS IN PUBLIC THATS HOW THE PHOTO GOT TAKEN IF SHE HAD BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED AT HOME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BREAKING AND ENTERING

what do they mean "it wasn't taken surreptitiously"? there isn't any implication here except that because Freda Wallace was in public, she consented to any pictures that might be taken of her? this is just "look at the way she* was dressed". snopes is doing rape culture.

keep thinking about how I wrote in my dissertation about how every time a new form of public/social space emerges it's immediately popular with kids and teenagers who see it as a chance at freedom and then adults colonise it and kick them out. this happened with malls in the 80s and diners in the 50s and pool halls in the 20s. my dad was doing research on this trend in like 1975. and I was like "yeah so this is going to happen to the internet" and then five years later every government suddenly decided to ban kids from everywhere online. I hate being right especially when I don't even get paid for it

Also just to clear up any further confusion, cerebrospinal fluid (as the name implies) is contained to just your brain and spinal cord. The rest are protected by mucous

some of them want to amuse you 😺. some of them want to be amused 😸

now all the things you guys have told me about american high schools are starting to make sense

for the record im not technially 100% anti-AI, in the sense that its a broad category of tech being lumped under one umbrella term so it feels over-zealous to say i hate all of it all the time forever. but i also think trying to discuss what it actually IS good for is difficult right now when i cant take one step without something trying to convince me to use chatgpt to summarize my life and speed up my hobbies and turn my friends into chatbots and optimize my life into oblivion. i am certain there is nuance to the topic but can we stop cramming the square peg into the round hole before you start trying to sell me on the legitimate benefits of the square peg. please.

losing the battle with my own self-control so will briefly comment and say that categorizing certain types of ai as straightforwardly good and other types as "bad evil," even for the sake of summary, doesn't really hold water. just to give two counterexamples to the distinctions drawn above, large language models ("evil") are being used by human rights groups to parse huge datasets about police abuse while analytical ai ("helpful") is also the kind of ai that animates facial recognition software and the increasingly ubiquitous searchable license plate databases that police are using to stalk people. the goodness or badness of a given ai tool has less to do with its type and more to do with things like scale and scope, transparency, ownership, and contextual application.

trying to have fun on the internet and not consciously think about how child abuse and csem is not taken seriously by most people and the ones who do think we should do a cyber patriot act

it is becoming increasingly clearer with each year that the only two schools of thought allowed to exist are "child rape is fine to eroticize and exists in an apolitical vacuum" and "the only way to stop child rape is to let parents hsve unauestioned dominion over their property as they have historically". does anyone else want to get out of this machine. the machine we're in. can we get out of it?

so embarrassing when you finally get around to watching or reading some landmark piece of media well known for having a massive slash fandom and finding yourself completely drawn in by the homoeroticism as well like oh my god has anyone else heard of these kirk and spock guys? sam and frodo? sherlock and watson? anyone else seeing this?