iNow

More like in the upcoming election(s)… It’s not entirely all bad. Many of those same writers currently striking are also themselves realizing improved more enjoyable outputs and scripts by supplementing their own talents and creativity with prompts to the LLMs. They’re often becoming better writers via use of AI, but I fully acknowledge that on-net their financial concerns around now this will change (decrease) demand for their skillsets are fully warranted. The blacksmiths felt similarly as cars replaced horse and buggies.

When did you decide to have personal feelings to be a male? Have you ever been excluded from sports for “feeling” that way? Calling them “personal feelings about their gender” is so dismissive as to be offensive, intoscience. The lack of understanding and empathy embedded here is profound. Perhaps next you’ll reach out your hand and pat transgendered people on their foreheads. Because it’s no longer socially acceptable to agitate the masses by turning them against the blacks or the Jews or the gays or the whatever’s. Now they use the trans and the woke and the left to dehumanize “the other” and make it easier to dismiss “them” and ignore their individuality. And you appear to be suggesting that it’s the historically protected cisgendered folks who are suffering from systemic and institutionally imposed unfairness?

An important component of how our cultures form comes from the way we pass on stories and knowledge across generations. We’re stronger bc we don’t have to start with a tabula rasa with each new life and can instead jump from a higher plane, spring boarding off the knowledge of those who came before us. These generational caches of information and behavioral narratives like “don’t poke the bee hive” and “avoid eating that mushroom” and “it’s better not to fornicate on ant hills” were sung to each other in songs around campfires. These stories allowed tribal elders to teach the young what was expected and how to act to survive the harshnesses of nature. They also reinforced norms and expectations among aging group members. Those spoken songs turned into written words and now into typed texts today, but the process of conveying information socially through sound started well before humanity and occurs in copious ways across the animal kingdom. Animals at least don’t need to tie up memory resources remembering three distinct versions of English homonyms like their, they’re, and there… so maybe we humans just need to take their cue and start singing to each other once more. After all, our ears are more efficient when they hear all three words as one ✌🏼

Cool! Nice share.

AI bots are already on these and other forums. We’re their classrooms and training grounds. Jobs will definitely change. No longer are blue collar jobs the only ones being taken over by robots, but now also white collar jobs. Finance and accounting, customer service agents, even creatives. Jobs will shift toward those who can’t be replaced by AI like plumbing and nursing and cooking. Service jobs… and those continuing to wear their white collars will be those who’ve learned to use AI to amplify and magnify their capabilities. The car replaced the horse and all the jobs that came with it, and then entire new sectors of the economy came into being in support of vehicles. Creative destruction it’s called, and we’re in for a Cambrian level explosion of creation and destruction of knowledge and jobs and culture as a whole in the years ahead. It is thus. The amazing Kreskin has spoken

I'm not here to define the criterion for each division of sports. I'm merely working to convince opponents that changes to criteria which do a better job of including trans individuals are both possible and appropriate.

Listen, there's no need to escalate! lol

They sometimes beat us there, too. Calling it a lift instead of an elevator is FAR more efficient. Or boot instead of trunk.

That "(c) don't care" part does a lot of the heavy lifting here. The author is maybe in a rush or using a tiny keyboard so prioritizes speed over accuracy and perfection. The author maybe doesn't care about the audience reading it, doesn't respect them or doesn't feel their ( )worth the effort, or DOES respect them and just feels it's "good enough and they'll understand what I mean." The author maybe doesn't care enough to improve themselves, or to bother trying to be better, or to learn new things... "I don't care about there, they're, and their..." But not knowing the proper way is the one that I find sticks in my craw. It suggests to me the person doesn't read. NOTE: I've had some extremely intelligent friends who suffered from a bit of dyslexia. They seemed to struggle a bit with using the correct homonym, as well. Anecdotal, and correlation isn't causation, but possibly connected.

This is exactly my opinion too, with maybe some need to flex on the "tested and proven" component. After all, how the hell do we test and prove if we never even allow it in the first place? I'm arguing the extreme example when saying we need not worry about how someone urinates (standing or sitting or both). Sports rules are TOTALLY arbitrary. It's sort of the nature of sports. "Pick up this thing and throw it there, but not this way and it's illegal to do it this other way. The person who gets more of these other things wins, but not if they XYZ..." We could equally say you're only allowed to play if you're a brunette... arbitrary. Since the rules are arbitrary, they CAN be updated, SHOULD be updated, and the need only remains to discuss how BEST to do so. I'm all for more testing and proving... but cannot abide REFUSING and/or BANNING.

I suspect it's predicting the next word

The example here is NOT from North America

removed

Or, at the VERY least updated ever so slightly so as to stop needlessly excluding this already marginalized, ostracized, and too frequently victimized community of trans folks. Not really, since there are way more than 2 sexes (which is really an overly simplified childish binary that doesn't accurately map on to the world in which we actually exist). https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/ I've been recommending merit / skills based qualification systems for some time now. The plumbing we use to urinate need not enter the equation. Isn't this moot if we focus on skill and merit as primary?

English is weird and it's two hard too remember witch homonym is wich. Also, spellcheck is an asshole sometimes.

Sure, I’ll guess! How about: Arbitrary? If you dislike that answer, we could always choose instead something about “individuals exist along a spectrum,” maybe? Hmm… no. You’re right. That’s probably arbitrary, too. May I perhaps come back to you on this another time? Human categories and labels with their context dependence and evolution over time is annoying sometimes, we agree. What is a “typical extent” in context of this alleged advantage? If something is “typical,” then surely large numbers are involved. Yet you’ve been asked several times for evidence and examples and she’s still the only one you’ve cited AFAICT.

Please elaborate on what you mean by "less potential," why this matters, and then finally why we are supposedly not allowed to consider them elite. Yes, you keep saying this. I'm not buying it.

Which is why I reference acceptance (more specifically, the lack of acceptance) as part of the problem. These trans individuals are not accurately described as "men." Continuing to use the wrong labels for them is a form of prejudice. Like this, for example. Refusal to accept them. In fairness to you, this is my own interpretation of your comments and not something you've explicitly stated. However, it's embedded in nearly every comment you make. You continue talking about how unfair it would be for a person born with XY chromosomes to compete in elite sports previously populated solely with those born with XX chromosomes. The suggestion is that the trans person born XY is somehow physically stronger, faster, etc. Multiple examples have been provided that this is not generally the case, yet you continue pursuing this line of argumentation. I am trying to summarize all of this by saying "not all trans athletes born XY are physically more capable than those born XX." Some might be, but not all... and your posts thus far don't seem to include that important nuance or acknowledgement. It's been suggested in this and nearly every other trans-related thread in which you've participated.... this idea that the trans athlete is a hulking brute who will dominate and hurt the poor defenseless lady folk.

Define "real"

How is this any different than it already is today? The better players elevate to the next level. We don’t let Labron James play on the junior varsity basketball team, either. So what? You continue operating on this fallacious premise that all trans athletes are massive Hulked out she monsters who can bench press dump trunks.

What is it about my position supporting merit-based entry and classification systems across sports divisions that is so difficult for you to comprehend? You’ve repeated this rather often. I’m not convinced it’s either true or relevant. Can you convince me?

I’m not here to draw the lines. I’m here to remind you that it’s entirely possible to do so without any reference to sex and gender. Said another way, there is no reason transgendered individuals should be prevented from competing alongside the cisgendered folks already doing so.

It’s reasonable to assume that a person who can’t figure out how to edit their profile photo at SFN likely isn’t the type of person who can change browser settings to display mobile/desktop versions or who understands the nature of payloads. ✌🏼

I am fine with merit based approaches. Old fashioned binary leagues are lazy. That said, it can also be both.

It looks different from one platform to the next. Phone is different from desktop, for example.