Ali
@astromaker.bsky.social
Humanist software engineer. Woodwork, Astronomy and all things sciency.
More replies to others than original posts.
I have a couple of 'controversial' opinions but always try to be polite.
More replies to others than original posts.
I have a couple of 'controversial' opinions but always try to be polite.
I believe the line they cut was describing Trump as the most corrupt president in US history. That seems pretty defensible to me.
November 25, 2025 at 10:27 PM
I believe the line they cut was describing Trump as the most corrupt president in US history. That seems pretty defensible to me.
Definitely will listen to this now. At what point should I mentally insert that line?
November 25, 2025 at 11:23 AM
Definitely will listen to this now. At what point should I mentally insert that line?
Don't like that diagram though, it's very unclear as to what it's trying to convey.
November 21, 2025 at 12:17 PM
Don't like that diagram though, it's very unclear as to what it's trying to convey.
It doesn't "show that sex is a spectrum". It shows that people are male or female but the paths to those two ends are full of ways they can go wrong (biology is messy).
Again, this has nothing to do with trans-rights since trans people are no more likely to have a DSD than the rest of us.
Again, this has nothing to do with trans-rights since trans people are no more likely to have a DSD than the rest of us.
November 20, 2025 at 3:25 PM
It doesn't "show that sex is a spectrum". It shows that people are male or female but the paths to those two ends are full of ways they can go wrong (biology is messy).
Again, this has nothing to do with trans-rights since trans people are no more likely to have a DSD than the rest of us.
Again, this has nothing to do with trans-rights since trans people are no more likely to have a DSD than the rest of us.
Fair enough, but that article did not describe anything other than the two sexes, varieties of behaviour and morphology within them and DSDs that affect them.
So it doesn't articulate why you might believe there are more than two sexes.
So it doesn't articulate why you might believe there are more than two sexes.
November 20, 2025 at 12:42 PM
Fair enough, but that article did not describe anything other than the two sexes, varieties of behaviour and morphology within them and DSDs that affect them.
So it doesn't articulate why you might believe there are more than two sexes.
So it doesn't articulate why you might believe there are more than two sexes.
Yes, DSDs exist. Some people are male with a DSD and some are female with a DSD. What relation does this bare on transgender people. You're not by any chance confusing sex with gender are you?
November 19, 2025 at 10:39 PM
Yes, DSDs exist. Some people are male with a DSD and some are female with a DSD. What relation does this bare on transgender people. You're not by any chance confusing sex with gender are you?
Oh, no, I absolutely believe they are different!
November 19, 2025 at 4:10 PM
Oh, no, I absolutely believe they are different!
Are you disagreeing that there are only two sexes, or that mammals can change sex? Or both?
I'm not claiming that trans people are not oppressed, just that they are not another sex than the one they were born as.
I'm not claiming that trans people are not oppressed, just that they are not another sex than the one they were born as.
November 19, 2025 at 3:50 PM
Are you disagreeing that there are only two sexes, or that mammals can change sex? Or both?
I'm not claiming that trans people are not oppressed, just that they are not another sex than the one they were born as.
I'm not claiming that trans people are not oppressed, just that they are not another sex than the one they were born as.
Not really.
All the examples in that article were either asexual, or had two distinct sexes. Morphology and behaviour of the sexes is indeed massively varied and interesting throughout nature, but there are still only 2 sexes and mammals (including primates, including humans) cannot change sex.
All the examples in that article were either asexual, or had two distinct sexes. Morphology and behaviour of the sexes is indeed massively varied and interesting throughout nature, but there are still only 2 sexes and mammals (including primates, including humans) cannot change sex.
November 19, 2025 at 1:42 PM
Not really.
All the examples in that article were either asexual, or had two distinct sexes. Morphology and behaviour of the sexes is indeed massively varied and interesting throughout nature, but there are still only 2 sexes and mammals (including primates, including humans) cannot change sex.
All the examples in that article were either asexual, or had two distinct sexes. Morphology and behaviour of the sexes is indeed massively varied and interesting throughout nature, but there are still only 2 sexes and mammals (including primates, including humans) cannot change sex.
While I applaud your criticism of the disaster in the White House, and many more of your stances, on this topic I have questions. That chap's explanation clarified nothing.
November 19, 2025 at 1:09 PM
While I applaud your criticism of the disaster in the White House, and many more of your stances, on this topic I have questions. That chap's explanation clarified nothing.
Really? I have questions.
November 19, 2025 at 1:06 PM
Really? I have questions.
I agree.
But...
They already avoid loads of tax. Introducing a new 'wealth tax' just means most will adjust their strategy to avoid that one as well. You won't raise £24b or anything close.
Sadly.
I think you need to read this.
takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/wealth-tax...
But...
They already avoid loads of tax. Introducing a new 'wealth tax' just means most will adjust their strategy to avoid that one as well. You won't raise £24b or anything close.
Sadly.
I think you need to read this.
takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/wealth-tax...
November 18, 2025 at 1:34 PM
I agree.
But...
They already avoid loads of tax. Introducing a new 'wealth tax' just means most will adjust their strategy to avoid that one as well. You won't raise £24b or anything close.
Sadly.
I think you need to read this.
takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/wealth-tax...
But...
They already avoid loads of tax. Introducing a new 'wealth tax' just means most will adjust their strategy to avoid that one as well. You won't raise £24b or anything close.
Sadly.
I think you need to read this.
takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/wealth-tax...
I would imagine any trans person who thinks they may be affected by this stuff would be eager to have a cheek swab to confirm that they are really the opposite sex to appearances. And would shout such confirmatory results from the rooftops.
I've not heard of anyone doing that.
I wonder why?
I've not heard of anyone doing that.
I wonder why?
November 18, 2025 at 1:23 PM
I would imagine any trans person who thinks they may be affected by this stuff would be eager to have a cheek swab to confirm that they are really the opposite sex to appearances. And would shout such confirmatory results from the rooftops.
I've not heard of anyone doing that.
I wonder why?
I've not heard of anyone doing that.
I wonder why?
I block nobody (though I do mute people). I probably would block people who threaten or abuse but haven't met any thus far. Possibly because they have self blocked through the lists I've ended up on.
I think the lists are too blunt a tool.
I think the lists are too blunt a tool.
November 18, 2025 at 12:04 PM
I block nobody (though I do mute people). I probably would block people who threaten or abuse but haven't met any thus far. Possibly because they have self blocked through the lists I've ended up on.
I think the lists are too blunt a tool.
I think the lists are too blunt a tool.
Do we have research that supports that claim that the general population is more at risk than the trans community? Considering there must be very few trans-people, a rate of 1 murder per year seems like it might be quite high as a proportion of the total. I'd like to see the evidence.
November 17, 2025 at 12:11 PM
Do we have research that supports that claim that the general population is more at risk than the trans community? Considering there must be very few trans-people, a rate of 1 murder per year seems like it might be quite high as a proportion of the total. I'd like to see the evidence.
Answering my own question, a quick Google (or rather a question to CoPilot) indicates that Bell Labs demonstrated the first potentially commercially viable solar cell in 1954.
www.ebsco.com/research-sta...
So it's not a random date.
www.ebsco.com/research-sta...
So it's not a random date.
Bell Scientists Develop the Photovoltaic Cell | Research Starters | EBSCO Research
<p>The development of the photovoltaic cell, a technology that converts sunlight into electrical power, has its roots dating back to 1839 when Alexandre-Edmond Becquerel first observed a voltage gener...
www.ebsco.com
November 14, 2025 at 9:16 AM
Answering my own question, a quick Google (or rather a question to CoPilot) indicates that Bell Labs demonstrated the first potentially commercially viable solar cell in 1954.
www.ebsco.com/research-sta...
So it's not a random date.
www.ebsco.com/research-sta...
So it's not a random date.
I'm sure this is fantastic news but why does the graph start in 1954? What happened in that year, because without that context it looks like you picked a year at random.
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 AM
I'm sure this is fantastic news but why does the graph start in 1954? What happened in that year, because without that context it looks like you picked a year at random.
I bet nobody understands magnets like he does.
November 12, 2025 at 11:43 AM
I bet nobody understands magnets like he does.
I think their argument will be that *reading* the scripted news headlines is different from reporting or commenting and has stricter guidelines.
It'll be some non-excuse like that.
It'll be some non-excuse like that.
November 7, 2025 at 3:09 PM
I think their argument will be that *reading* the scripted news headlines is different from reporting or commenting and has stricter guidelines.
It'll be some non-excuse like that.
It'll be some non-excuse like that.
Yes, I did see it at the time, and I agree that she was undoing an ideological perspective and replacing it with simple factual language. And that it was a micro expression.
I don't know what their rules are for reading the news but they may have something about not adding personal expressions.
I don't know what their rules are for reading the news but they may have something about not adding personal expressions.
November 7, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Yes, I did see it at the time, and I agree that she was undoing an ideological perspective and replacing it with simple factual language. And that it was a micro expression.
I don't know what their rules are for reading the news but they may have something about not adding personal expressions.
I don't know what their rules are for reading the news but they may have something about not adding personal expressions.
I believe their position is that it was her *facial expression* before she went off-script and clarified that 'people', in context of the item, really meant 'women' that was unacceptable.
Not that 'people' was ok and 'women' was not.
Not that 'people' was ok and 'women' was not.
November 7, 2025 at 9:56 AM
I believe their position is that it was her *facial expression* before she went off-script and clarified that 'people', in context of the item, really meant 'women' that was unacceptable.
Not that 'people' was ok and 'women' was not.
Not that 'people' was ok and 'women' was not.