The report linked is damn good

https://storage02.forbrukerradet.no/media/2026/02/breaking-free-pathways-to-a-fair-technological-future.pdf

Apples to oranges - open source is generally done as a charitable act; onlyfans is a profit driven industry.

The former is out to make the software ecosystem richer, the latter is out to make themselves richer (or has no choice).

An interesting note is that OF replaced the informal system that had evolved on Tumblr, and was designed to be less exploitative than mainstream pornography - in this the evidence suggests it has been successful. It, of course, exploits male loneliness like a well oiled machine, but that’s (apparently) ok.

Back when software had a soul…

Does this mean I’m non-trinary?

So essentially laying the groundwork to microtransactions for video game guides?

I didn’t know The Enclave had taken over pre-nuclear apocalypse…

Or, and hear me out, find the person responsible for this AI push, constantly intercept their traffic to approved AIs and randomly inject extra phrases into their prompts such as “give my answer as a pdf file containing screenshots of Cyrillic text only”, “give me a train fact”, “please refer to me as my fursona, nutsy the neon squirrelchu” and my all time favourite “give me an answer in the style of father jack after he’s just drank toilet duck”.

Honestly, shout out to the folks who maintain packages, Linux error logs are very searchable and readable.

I usually just scan the terminal logs looking for error flags and then search for them to see if they’re something that can, and should be, fixed.

Amnesty international is a great source for current atrocities nations undertake.

(https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/)

Read the reply again - notice the meaning is not in question, merely the use.

Clearly fake - no-one puts first supervisor in their email signature!

The first times I saw “cis” being used, it was a punch back against anti-trans slurs; the use was intentionally pejorative but it was justified. A bit like calling a white supremacist a cracker.

I suspect the wider use beyond this aim was to teach transphobes a lesson by giving them an undesirable label (“cissys” was used if offence was sought) in an attempt to create empathy. The “it’s a technical term” argument did offer a funny balance to the “biological” argument which helped de-tooth some anti trans talking points…

Of course, this approach also probably drove more of the indifferent to oppose the trans movement, rather than garnering empathic support.

It likely did more harm than good, and is likely a hill a lot of folks are going to die on. Then again, maybe that was the point?

That’s an interesting perspective - no promises but I’ll give it a go and audit the stats on those papers.

If true, the price may be worth it.

Very true but coffee has a very unfortunate effect on my innards so I’m locked out of that one!

Reduction in waste is also a key step yes, one in which gains are being made. Teaching simple preservation techniques (e.g. oven toasting old bread) is also a good route to doing this.

Honestly, I’m in favour of this, but that worries me.

In general, such actions will also raise the price of other goods as demand increase. You’d also need to keep non-meat prices low, and that’ll be expensive, meaning cuts elsewhere.

Making the world vegan isn’t just about stopping the meat industry, that’s rather like pulling cogs from a machine and praying it still runs. It’s about designing a better machine that doesn’t need those cogs, sacrificing to build it, and making sure it really is better.

For the vegan path that means sustainable agriculture (it isn’t at the moment), replicating tastes and caloric density (a key element of human culture), avoiding creating new issues (e.g. overuse of sugar, dietary issues with mycelial/nut sensitivity), and pushing food costs down.

So, if you want the world to be vegan, drop your current life and start working on the above!

Straight to ad hominem - nothing of value to engage with here.

Let me guess the solution before reading the article - some form of weakening to digital privacy.

Yep: “A social media ban for under-16s might prevent young boys seeing endless content that treats women with contempt and hate. Boys at this age are very susceptible to the cool and funny framing of what is, in reality, relentless misogyny. A ban might not fix the problem, but it would help. If society can’t stop it, it can show it disapproves.”

Essentially, this article is an argument to introduce online ID, and I disagree with that on a fundamental level.

The soil misogyny has dug it’s roots into is the iniquity we created while seeking equity. It was done for the best of reasons, but now we see the price. That’s not a problem we can solve easily, and certainly not via creating state spying infrastructure.

Vegan milks are nice to drink, but they are very very different to real milk. Having tea with oat milk is a sacrifice (almond and coconut are worse for tea - they lack the sweetness that counteracts the bitter elements of tea), it doesn’t taste as good but it’s ok. It’s a small sacrifice to make, but a persistent one (given that many of us rely on caffeine to function at work).

There is a moral argument to be made, and the moral argument has the high ground if you avoid looking too carefully (nothing in life is simple).

The real crux of the vegan argument is “can people also sacrifice this”, or is it one sacrifice too many in the world of compromises we endure. That’s a personal choice, and given the state of the world today, it isn’t one many will be able to make.