https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Sunday, February 21, 2016
j reacts to the idea of youtube accepting character minimums for comments
one of the best things that could be done for a site like youtube is character minimums. you float through that jenner page, and it's just one-line post after one-line post.
again: 20,000 posts, ten ideas. it's the same post over and over. it doesn't seem to be enough to get the idea down and have it catch a wind of upvotes - people want their own posts. and, i'd encourage that, actually. except that it ought to pre-suppose an original thought, y'know?
if you made it so that you'd have to put down 500 characters before you're allowed to post? you'd clear out 90% of the posts. you'd get rid of all of the "you're st00pid!" posts. & etc.
as a user and a content creator? that would be the change i'd make, if i was going to make one. not character maximums - character minimums.
people will get upset at first. but, you'd just have to coach them along a little.
your post is not long enough. please type a little more.
if you're having difficulty typing more, maybe you'd rather find a post to upvote, instead?
again: 20,000 posts, ten ideas. it's the same post over and over. it doesn't seem to be enough to get the idea down and have it catch a wind of upvotes - people want their own posts. and, i'd encourage that, actually. except that it ought to pre-suppose an original thought, y'know?
if you made it so that you'd have to put down 500 characters before you're allowed to post? you'd clear out 90% of the posts. you'd get rid of all of the "you're st00pid!" posts. & etc.
as a user and a content creator? that would be the change i'd make, if i was going to make one. not character maximums - character minimums.
people will get upset at first. but, you'd just have to coach them along a little.
your post is not long enough. please type a little more.
if you're having difficulty typing more, maybe you'd rather find a post to upvote, instead?
at
15:33
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
i just created and deleted a "normal" google+ profile trying to find an old notifications list for the now almost wiped down dtk page.
so, i got the old
"why don't you want to use google+?" page.
because i don't have any friends. why do you think i spend so much time on the internet?
and, you know, even if i did, what are the chances that i want to read somebody else's feed?
zero.
cat pictures and pseudo-science. i'm jumping at the opportunity, guys. really. reading my facebook feed was the best way i've ever spent my time. honestly.
i'm all about sending information out!
but, if you're cia and you're into tracking me? i've been clear about this on repeated occasions. it's real easy. i know nobody. i have no friends. i have no acquaintances. and i have no interest in meeting friends or building acquaintances, because i'm a bitter, misanthropic loner. cool?
now, give me access to my notifications...
the other option is that i need to go through my view history video-by-video. and, see, here's the thing: i will actually do this. really.
so, i got the old
"why don't you want to use google+?" page.
because i don't have any friends. why do you think i spend so much time on the internet?
and, you know, even if i did, what are the chances that i want to read somebody else's feed?
zero.
cat pictures and pseudo-science. i'm jumping at the opportunity, guys. really. reading my facebook feed was the best way i've ever spent my time. honestly.
i'm all about sending information out!
but, if you're cia and you're into tracking me? i've been clear about this on repeated occasions. it's real easy. i know nobody. i have no friends. i have no acquaintances. and i have no interest in meeting friends or building acquaintances, because i'm a bitter, misanthropic loner. cool?
now, give me access to my notifications...
the other option is that i need to go through my view history video-by-video. and, see, here's the thing: i will actually do this. really.
at
14:02
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
j reacts to misperceptions around the science of how chromosomes determine physical sex
i've been sorting through this page trying to find the comments i left a few months ago, which were designed to address certain commonly expressed statements (of the 20,000 comments here, there's only about 10 ideas expressed) and i just feel the need to address an issue that is expressed here over and over again: biology.
it's all about chromosomes. x's and y's. but, see, this is the problem of knowledge disseminated to people that don't understand how to comprehend it. what are chromosomes, anyways? we know that they code for sex differences, but what exactly does that mean?
the confusion people are having is probably in the catholic concept of conception. they're converting what they think they understand about conception into a fixed idea of sexuality. god creates chromosomes, and chromosomes carry out god's plan. this is wrong, but it's the broad understanding of things.
here's a truth that might surprise people: if you take a genetically female foetus and you flush it in testosterone, it will develop male sexual characteristics. if you take a genetically male foetus and you flush it in estrogen, it will develop female sexual characteristics.
how can that be? you thought the chromosomes uniquely determined the sex, and that was carrying out god's plan. but, what the chromosomes actually code for - both in the womb and in later life - is hormone expression.
the chromosome argument is consequently rather lacking. it is true that transgendered people do not modify their chromosomes. but, the chromosomes only determine their biological sex in terms of how they determine the body's chemistry - and transgendered people do swap out that body chemistry, which is the actual defining point of biological sex.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OwDp2LMVbg
it seems like posts that are too long are getting filtered, now. remarkable.
it took me weeks to even realize i was getting filtered. months...
i'm off the platform, for obvious reasons - whether this is political or the result of a systems glitch kind of doesn't matter. it's just: wow.
youtube. it has electrolytes.
it's all about chromosomes. x's and y's. but, see, this is the problem of knowledge disseminated to people that don't understand how to comprehend it. what are chromosomes, anyways? we know that they code for sex differences, but what exactly does that mean?
the confusion people are having is probably in the catholic concept of conception. they're converting what they think they understand about conception into a fixed idea of sexuality. god creates chromosomes, and chromosomes carry out god's plan. this is wrong, but it's the broad understanding of things.
here's a truth that might surprise people: if you take a genetically female foetus and you flush it in testosterone, it will develop male sexual characteristics. if you take a genetically male foetus and you flush it in estrogen, it will develop female sexual characteristics.
how can that be? you thought the chromosomes uniquely determined the sex, and that was carrying out god's plan. but, what the chromosomes actually code for - both in the womb and in later life - is hormone expression.
the chromosome argument is consequently rather lacking. it is true that transgendered people do not modify their chromosomes. but, the chromosomes only determine their biological sex in terms of how they determine the body's chemistry - and transgendered people do swap out that body chemistry, which is the actual defining point of biological sex.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OwDp2LMVbg
it seems like posts that are too long are getting filtered, now. remarkable.
it took me weeks to even realize i was getting filtered. months...
i'm off the platform, for obvious reasons - whether this is political or the result of a systems glitch kind of doesn't matter. it's just: wow.
youtube. it has electrolytes.
at
13:33
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
j reacts to posters that marked her as a spammer for deleting their replies
so, i've done enough testing that it's clear to me that a lot (most...) of the posts that i'm making on youtube are invisible to everybody except myself.
that goes a long way to explain why the hit count came down. and, this is very sneaky - because i experience no signs of censorship. i can see my posts. if i go back to the page, my posts are there. i get no error message. but, if i log out of the site and come back, i can no longer see the posts.
that is behaviour that couldn't possibly be designed with anything other than political censorship in mind.
let's see if i can jam this....
i may have been targeted specifically because i had a habit of removing posts made to my posts. but, let's be clear about a few things.
(1) it was my post. i had the functionality to remove the responses to my posts. and, frankly, i believe i had ownership of those posts. no rules broken, there.
(2) i was actually very enlightened in the way i did this. i'm trying to save the conversations i had. that means plenty of people didn't get deleted - and there were plenty of interesting back and forths.
now, of course, some of the morons that ended up with deleted posts may disagree. but, that's a function of their idiocy - and the problem in the first place. just because they don't realize they're buffoons doesn't mean i have a responsibility to listen to them.
it's just another symptom, really. youtube was perhaps too good for it's user base, for a while.
i don't feel i have a choice but to stop posting here, seriously. they've reduced the platform to something that is essentially useless for anything but trolling. but, if that's what they want, they can get ready for some of it...
what i'm saying is that i may have gotten a very high number of complaints, because i deleted a large number of posts.
but, if you saw those posts, you'd understand - they were personal attacks, baseless insults, unsupported arguments and just flagrant idiocy.
the difference is that i didn't cry to an authority figure. i just removed the posts. then, the people that were posting nonsense and insults complained that their posts were being removed, and i'm the one that ends up getting silenced - while they keep on posting stupidity.
should i have reported them instead of taking matters into my own hands?
no.
the system was designed so that people could police their own content, and that was actually an ideal way to do it.
1) the owner of the video could decide if they wanted the thread there or not; if the owner of the video removed the thread, it appeared only in google+.
2) the owner of the thread could decide who was allowed to comment on the thread, and which comments were allowed to stand.
this allowed for people to moderate their own content - this is the anarchist ideal of self-moderation. it's easy to see why i liked it...
but, people didn't seem to understand the system, or thought that they should have the right to comment on other people's posts, whether they liked it or not. they weren't able to get the abstraction of personal property rights. so, they complained to authority figures, who had to step in - and i'm the one that got punished for it.
again: it's not a situation where i wish i had reacted differently. it's a situation where i'm learning that this is a bad platform, and that i need to adjust to it's failings.
the other option was that my content, while it existed, would not have been the pleasant conversations that people became accustomed to seeing my name attached to. instead, it would have been full of people posting personal insults, back and forth name-calling, strawmen arguments, unsupported arguments, stupid memes - everything else on youtube, essentially. and, then i would have stopped using the platform quite a long time ago. it was either that i cleaned these threads up and pissed a lot of people off, or that i didn't use the system at all.
and, you just have to laugh, right? people wanted in on my comments because they were high profile enough to be noticed. but, that relied on my ability to screen the garbage out. in the end, the garbage i screened out seems to have ganged up on me and has gotten me declared a spammer, out of spite.
but, i wouldn't have had anything worth noting if i had let anybody and everybody go ahead and vomit all over my posts.
in the end, i got nailed for using the system as it was designed, and actually succeeding in making it better, and the youtube comment system has remained a nest of absolute stupidity. if anything, it's worse now than it's ever been.
i can't regret that. rather, i have to point out that i'm a victim of stupidity.
listen: this is how the world works, right?
where's the alternate history where everybody listens to jesus, agrees and goes to smoke a fatty in the park?
mass idiocy is normal. intelligence is always persecuted.
they hate you when you're clever....
the reality is that any other outcome would be unheard of - astonishing.
really, i should be content in realizing that i'm lucky that i haven't been lynched, yet.
i'm almost done in clearing the page down. i should get close to 1500 pages in the end. it's probably 1500/2000 or so. i'm sure the lost ideas will regenerate elsewhere, eventually.
that goes a long way to explain why the hit count came down. and, this is very sneaky - because i experience no signs of censorship. i can see my posts. if i go back to the page, my posts are there. i get no error message. but, if i log out of the site and come back, i can no longer see the posts.
that is behaviour that couldn't possibly be designed with anything other than political censorship in mind.
let's see if i can jam this....
i may have been targeted specifically because i had a habit of removing posts made to my posts. but, let's be clear about a few things.
(1) it was my post. i had the functionality to remove the responses to my posts. and, frankly, i believe i had ownership of those posts. no rules broken, there.
(2) i was actually very enlightened in the way i did this. i'm trying to save the conversations i had. that means plenty of people didn't get deleted - and there were plenty of interesting back and forths.
now, of course, some of the morons that ended up with deleted posts may disagree. but, that's a function of their idiocy - and the problem in the first place. just because they don't realize they're buffoons doesn't mean i have a responsibility to listen to them.
it's just another symptom, really. youtube was perhaps too good for it's user base, for a while.
i don't feel i have a choice but to stop posting here, seriously. they've reduced the platform to something that is essentially useless for anything but trolling. but, if that's what they want, they can get ready for some of it...
what i'm saying is that i may have gotten a very high number of complaints, because i deleted a large number of posts.
but, if you saw those posts, you'd understand - they were personal attacks, baseless insults, unsupported arguments and just flagrant idiocy.
the difference is that i didn't cry to an authority figure. i just removed the posts. then, the people that were posting nonsense and insults complained that their posts were being removed, and i'm the one that ends up getting silenced - while they keep on posting stupidity.
should i have reported them instead of taking matters into my own hands?
no.
the system was designed so that people could police their own content, and that was actually an ideal way to do it.
1) the owner of the video could decide if they wanted the thread there or not; if the owner of the video removed the thread, it appeared only in google+.
2) the owner of the thread could decide who was allowed to comment on the thread, and which comments were allowed to stand.
this allowed for people to moderate their own content - this is the anarchist ideal of self-moderation. it's easy to see why i liked it...
but, people didn't seem to understand the system, or thought that they should have the right to comment on other people's posts, whether they liked it or not. they weren't able to get the abstraction of personal property rights. so, they complained to authority figures, who had to step in - and i'm the one that got punished for it.
again: it's not a situation where i wish i had reacted differently. it's a situation where i'm learning that this is a bad platform, and that i need to adjust to it's failings.
the other option was that my content, while it existed, would not have been the pleasant conversations that people became accustomed to seeing my name attached to. instead, it would have been full of people posting personal insults, back and forth name-calling, strawmen arguments, unsupported arguments, stupid memes - everything else on youtube, essentially. and, then i would have stopped using the platform quite a long time ago. it was either that i cleaned these threads up and pissed a lot of people off, or that i didn't use the system at all.
and, you just have to laugh, right? people wanted in on my comments because they were high profile enough to be noticed. but, that relied on my ability to screen the garbage out. in the end, the garbage i screened out seems to have ganged up on me and has gotten me declared a spammer, out of spite.
but, i wouldn't have had anything worth noting if i had let anybody and everybody go ahead and vomit all over my posts.
in the end, i got nailed for using the system as it was designed, and actually succeeding in making it better, and the youtube comment system has remained a nest of absolute stupidity. if anything, it's worse now than it's ever been.
i can't regret that. rather, i have to point out that i'm a victim of stupidity.
listen: this is how the world works, right?
where's the alternate history where everybody listens to jesus, agrees and goes to smoke a fatty in the park?
mass idiocy is normal. intelligence is always persecuted.
they hate you when you're clever....
the reality is that any other outcome would be unheard of - astonishing.
really, i should be content in realizing that i'm lucky that i haven't been lynched, yet.
i'm almost done in clearing the page down. i should get close to 1500 pages in the end. it's probably 1500/2000 or so. i'm sure the lost ideas will regenerate elsewhere, eventually.
at
07:17
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
j reacts to kasich being the only remaining candidate that can beat trump
a lot of the polling had bush over 10%. but, i still think you need to look at the bottom three - and realize that the major problem is that carson (who might try running for city council before he runs for president?) is going to hand trump the win.
carson's purpose may be to try and prevent blacks from voting in the democratic primary (and therefore give sanders, the "easier candidate", a boost), but it looks like it's doing more damage to the republicans than anything else.
the bottom three, together, would combine to second place. and i think that's very important to point out, because rubio is a sort of hybrid candidate - created through media obfuscation.
kasich is the sole remaining serious candidate. if he's not able to pull support from carson, soon, and bleed moderate support from trump, then the purpose of the primary becomes voting for trump to stop cruz - and trump wins. huge.
carson's purpose may be to try and prevent blacks from voting in the democratic primary (and therefore give sanders, the "easier candidate", a boost), but it looks like it's doing more damage to the republicans than anything else.
the bottom three, together, would combine to second place. and i think that's very important to point out, because rubio is a sort of hybrid candidate - created through media obfuscation.
kasich is the sole remaining serious candidate. if he's not able to pull support from carson, soon, and bleed moderate support from trump, then the purpose of the primary becomes voting for trump to stop cruz - and trump wins. huge.
at
03:14
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)