subwfr

I make sounds sometimes

[subwfr @subwfr]

@downdetector
oh the irony

[subwfr @subwfr]

@NotJinKazama @MongolianBeast1 @ostonox they likely are left wing, given they acknowledged it was funny. they are 100% right that you cannot claim to be morally superior while doing the exact same shit.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@sharkstunes @theportzero SICK!

looking forward to this,

I'd love to see a @sharkstunes and cybe (@Billain 's label) collab.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@UncutSpeech I'm scared because I can't tell if this is real...

[subwfr @subwfr]

@jjtkot @LuzLavoid @_ungovernable_ you absolute melon.

this is not "bypassing age verification"...

this is bypassing a reverification for people that have already verified and have been "flagged as teens" by AI, despite the FACT that everyone plays games and that is considered a "teen" activity.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@lasherluke @discord_support you legend, they are so fucking scummy with it.
almost every single person on discord plays games, so using AI to detect if someone is a teenager is stupid.

also, how are they detecting it? by reading our private messages?

[subwfr @subwfr]

@discord_support

what is this?
I live in the UK, and already gave you my ID as I have to use discord for my job.

Even though you ALREADY HAVE MY NAME, ADDRESS, FACE AND DATE OF BIRTH, you are making me REVERIFY?

because I make music and play games, you assume I am a teen.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@SpxRichy @LuzLavoid do it on desktop

[subwfr @subwfr]

@SpxRichy @LuzLavoid Worked for me, Sherlock.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@LuzLavoid you legend. their AI should be illegal, given I already gave them my literal fucking drivers license.
making me renew this is disgraceful.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@dcs_vortex @Telegraph @grok also, side note.
I want to thank you for taking the time to explain in more detail, as most people aren't capable of showing their thought processes.

you can't have a meaningful discussion if people say things without explaining themselves.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph Any rulings, both against and in favour of trans athletes should be held off until this study has been completed, as otherwise any policy made is inherently and objectively prejudiced.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@dcs_vortex @grok @Telegraph I was clarifying my point as "hermaphrodite" is not a term that can be used for humans, instead we use "ovotesticular DSD" because humans are not like other animals.
I was limited on characters and used "hermaphrodite" to save on the number of letters in the post.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@dcs_vortex @Telegraph @grok Your scepticism is valid, and is an important component of the scientific process.
However, dismissing evidence, no matter how small the sample size may be, is the least scientific way to proceed.

All discoveries ever were made by starting with low sample sizes.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@dcs_vortex @Telegraph @grok @grok surely dismissing research based on low sample size as being less valid than critiques based on little to no research is illogical, and that the solution would be to do MORE studies with GREATER sample sizes, not to make decisions based on no study.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph the rarity of this does not rule it out, it is still a bimodality if there are two scattered peaks, no matter how scattered those peaks are.

Binary is a STRICT 1/0 state.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph though this term is not usually used to describe humans, this term does describe the mechanism I described and fits my character limit.

"people possessing functional ovotestes" is more accurate

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph While there are two examples of gametes, sperm and ovum, their occurrence is not strictly binary. There are examples of cooccurring gametes. this is why the word "hermaphrodite" exists.

This means that the distribution of representation of these traits is objectively bimodal.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph "Biological sex traits (e.g., hormones, muscle mass) often form a bimodal distribution with overlap, not a strict binary"

not quite, you are close but you are, in the name of unbiasedness, taking a biased stance.

biological sex traits *ALWAYS* form bimodal distribution.

[subwfr @subwfr]

@grok @dcs_vortex @Telegraph my point is that a rigorous "either or" binary rule for a differentiation that is not binary, but is in fact a bimodal distribution with two intersectional gaussians, does not work.
These categories are arbitrary as a "biological" measure as there OBJECTIVELY IS a crossover.