Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | UncleMeat's commentslogin

Tons of groups rage at trans girls in high school sports, to the point of sending bomb threats. This wont stop at the olympics.

That’s not true. Men’s gymnastics and women’s gymnastics are totally different sets of events and men would get trounced in a women’s event.

Confidently incorrect. As an example - a banned Thomas salto had been developed and performed by a male gymnast first, and afterwards women starting trying to do it too. This is an anecdote example, but it shows that gymnastics is not some women dominated sport. As another example - four out of four named jumps in the figure skating are all named by male athletes who performed them first.

Only because they don't practice those events... If men practices those events they would be better at them

I'm not sure that is true. Beam targets flexibility in ways that no men's event does.

Putting aside that you argue entirely by assertion, that is one discipline, which therefore does not contradict the claim about "most disciplines".

Meanwhile the gap is well known to be massive in typical events, e.g.:

* Compare https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/womens-world-records/ vs https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/mens-world-records/ (or for that matter, browse through https://exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/StrengthStandards)

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_100_metres_world_recor... plateaued at numbers seen in men's competition over a century ago; a "sub-elite" female competitor sprints barely ahead of "intermediate recreational" men per https://marathonhandbook.com/average-100-meter-time/ . Griffith-Joyner's record-setting time would not have even qualified her to run with men since at least 2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_metres_at_the_Olympics

* I often hear it suggested that women show an advantage in longer races, but even at standard marathon length this is not borne out in results: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Boston_Marathon

* National and international level competitive women's sports teams regularly get trounced by teenaged boys in exhibition e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDH_r7-GN4o widely reported on last year and https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-b... from 2017

* The entire history of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis) requires quite a bit of creative interpretation to put women's tennis anywhere near the level of men's

That's just off the top of my head of anecdotes and examples I can recall being casually thrown around in these sorts of discussions.


If we could reduce our oil usage by 94% I'd weep with joy. Yes that's still a lot of oil. But it would be a complete sea change from what is currently happening.

All of the material in those panels is still there. You can break them down and build new panels out of their parts.

Full solarization will not eliminate our need for fossil fuels. But it would reduce it so dramatically as to render our current market unrecognizable.

The Atlantic spent like a year complaining about student protest and supporting efforts to punish protest, sometimes with arrests and felony charges. They further amplified the false connection between protests for palestine and antisemitism. The federal government responded to these protests by illegally cancelling grants and withholding money to universities and state governments sought to fire faculty for this stuff. And they have the gall to complain the students aren't protesting enough now.

The "oh where are the protests now" complaint is truly garbage, even if the article couches this a criticism of administration.


People make revenge porn to humiliate people. Regular old porn can't achieve that goal.

And yet, regular porn is highly monetizable, which was the actual question.

Surprisingly no; it's pretty much a money sink where everybody goes bankrupt after a couple of years. It's why it's attractive to money launderers.

I'm not sure that's true for onlyfans, which seems to have been highly profitable until the sudden death of its founder.

Excellent point: I'm talking about pornography 1.0, as it were.

1.0 should be attributed to pornography _before_ online distribution, and I suspect that was pretty profitable

Isn't 1.0 before _photography_ rather?

Drawings then?

Live action

and now we're back to livecams, time is just a flat circle man...

If anyone can fake it, is revenge porn even effective? Doesn't making it easy for anyone to fake also make all of it plausibly deniable?

maybe try to view this topic with a bit more criticality. i just quickly googled some keywords and am pasting the very first search entry so you get an idea:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sextortion-generative-ai-scam-e...

revenge porn or deepfakes in general are hugely harmful to people.

in the german-speaking world there's a scandal right now about a husband creating deepfakes of his wife, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/christia...

> One fake video, which she claims was sent to 21 men, depicted her being gang-raped

i think you're taking this topic lightly because you just assume that it's not a big deal. try to keep in mind that people's mental health and with this their life is at stake.

as with lots of things, the problem is not the tech itself, but the existence of men. it's not all men, but it's usually men. not sure how we'll solve this issue.


The answers to those questions have been clear for a while; it approaches concern trolling to keep on pretending to ask them in wide-eyed innocence.

Yes, revenge porn is very effective at causing harm, even though it can be generated.

No, because 'plausibly deniable' has never worked for social consequences and shame.


I think it can be effective, but it's the wrong term for it if it's fake. It's a mixture of other things, like libel and fabricating indecent images, and the same underlying blackmail.

Yes. You can go speak to some high school (or even middle school) girls who have had AI generated porn made of their likeness and shared with their classmates. Even though everybody knows that it is fake it is still humiliating, especially for a young person who is likely already self conscious about their body and sex.

A regular problem with national media is that Trump will say some completely ridiculous thing and then the media will report it by extracting the most possibly coherent idea from it and then paraphrase his words to express that coherent idea.

Trump will go on TV and say "somali immigrants are running mass fraud rings to fund terrorism and democrats are covering this up" and the media will run a headline like "Trump expresses concern about childcare fraud."

There was an interesting example recently where national media printed an AOC quote that left in the "uhs" and "ums", making her seem less competent and clear. But you'll regularly see this stuff removed from any direct quotes from Trump.


> Otherwise they are simple gambling and pointless.

People find gambling fun. Owners of gambling services make a lot of money. The prediction markets both run ads that present themselves as gambling products.

Both of these things are points that can sustain large businesses.


This was one of the theoretical points of betting markets.

But there are two large concrete betting markets now. And they advertise not as a "world state discovery system" but as a gambling platform for people to try their luck on. They are also large businesses that are making their owners rich. Falling back on "oh we are just interested in the intellectual exercise of information discovery" is not tenable at this point.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: