[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 1 points 36 minutes ago

Yeah they really didn't think through time zones there...

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 26 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The register providing contrast to the AWS infrastructure build out:

The Register is aware of government agencies building on-prem private clouds – sometimes on open source platforms – so they can scour code to soothe their security worries.

That's just a local data center, guys. Like how everything was done before "the cloud" became a buzzword.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 24 points 4 months ago

This entire situation has been bothering me for nearly 24 hours now and I think this is the best summary I've read of why the concept is bothering me so much.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

As the writer has stated, the writer views any pronouns that are not capitalized as misgendering them, and stated the pronouns were chosen specifically to reflect the writer's self-identified divine status as "goddess gender" (a term that, as far as I can tell, only exists on one wiki and the writer's blog).

The choice of capitalized pronouns was specifically chosen to imitate reverential capitalization, indicating divine status. As part of the writer's argument, this is intended to put the writer on the same level as the Abrahamic God. The writer also states in the article that "by affirming trans capitalised pronoun users, generally you are dismantling monotheistic oppression," which is a wild claim that I cannot agree with. The use of capitalized pronouns is therefore intended to strip the other party of their beliefs, either as a monotheist or atheist (as using reverential pronouns would also affirm a polytheist worldview that they disagree with).

I cannot use any pronouns that do not acknowledge the writer's claimed divine status without the writer claiming I am misgendering them. This is the most respectful way I can refer to the writer without acknowledging divine status or actively misgendering the writer.

I am more than happy to use whichever (lowercase and grammatically correct) pronouns are requested, as I am more than happy to refer to you as they/them, (which is also the default I try to use, though I understand some people are frustrated with they/them as it can strip a chosen gender identity).

Divine status is not a gender identity. Words mean things, and language can evolve, but this is specifically appropriating a style of writing while disparaging the source of that style.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 26 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The writer has stated in other comments that the writer is non-binary, which is the closest I can get to an answer to the question, but the actual answer to this question doesn't matter. We can apply gender identity to humans and non-humans (e.g. animals, fictional aliens, heck even ships) but divinity is not a gender, it's a supernatural or spiritual status.

People are free to identify as whatever gender (or non-gender) they so choose but by telling me "you must accept that I am divine," we're having an entirely different discussion. By requesting capitalized pronouns, the writer is also requesting their spiritual beliefs to be affirmed, which is implicitly (and apparently intentionally) forcing the other party to change their spiritual beliefs.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 26 points 4 months ago

So, wait, just to be clear: the writer is claiming that the writer's gender is not a gender but instead that the writer has some divine status?

M/F/NB/genderqueer/etc aside, human vs divine is not a gender question and this is no longer a discussion about pronouns showing respect and affirmation of gender identity, this is literally a demand for worship.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 42 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Citing an internal investigation, the Chinese ByteDance-owned app said its systems correctly identified the breach, but the ads were approved due to “human error” by a moderator.

This makes it so much worse. If it were "our algorithms didn't catch it" that'd be one thing, but "our algorithms caught it but we ran them anyway" reeks of malice.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 42 points 6 months ago

The least terrible option is not invading...

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 32 points 6 months ago

There's a great Veritasium video recently about this exact thing: https://youtu.be/d6iQrh2TK98

It's a human thing, though. This is just more evidence of LLM's problem with garbage in, garbage out: it's human biases being present in a system that people want to claim doesn't have them.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 30 points 8 months ago

Microsoft has been trying to be more proactive about this: they changed all their documentation to say Entra ID instead of Azure Active Directory...before actually changing Azure AD to be called Entra ID...

196
submitted 10 months ago by Rekhyt@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org
[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 26 points 10 months ago

I think there's absolutely a space for an industry achievement/recognition award like the Oscar, Tony, etc. The Game Awards just seems like the most cynical attempt at forcing one into the video game space.

[-] Rekhyt@beehaw.org 34 points 1 year ago

Yeah that's like saying someone setting you up on a blind date is arranging a marriage for you

34
submitted 1 year ago by Rekhyt@beehaw.org to c/lgbtq_plus@beehaw.org

Context: I am visiting a high school friend. Another friend who we both knew in high school has posted some interesting things recently. This friend has changed their name, but the friend I am visiting is not following them and is not aware of their transition.

How do I bring up this friend without dead naming them?

view more: next ›

Rekhyt

joined 1 year ago