Wordle 1,112 3/6*

🟨🟨⬛🟨⬛ 🟩🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

Who cares if anybody finds it weird? You should find it weird that they're so interested, in the first place. You have a close relationship with your sister, and you should cherish that while you can. Time has a way of splitting siblings apart, as you're already seeing for yourself. Soon it'll go from seeing each other every few months, to a couple times a year, to once every other Christmas dinner, to "I wonder if they'll send a 'happy birthday' text this year"...

I think that's what Diaspora is trying to be. I've not heard much from that project recently, though, so I have no clue if there's any activity on that platform anymore.

I'd eat a Bell Delphine burger. I wouldn't spend my own money on it, but I feel like that'd make for a fun story.

Sorry, I kinda got lost in the sauce on my original comment, lol. My issue isn't so much with the data collection, itself. My problem is that their FAQs say things that appear to be outright lies. Not even just embellishing the truth or something, but complete falsehoods.

I don't care so much that they collect a bit of data. But if they're wiling to lie to a potential user about their data collection, I can't help but wonder what else they might be willing to be dishonest about. I already have doubts about their crypto claim in the FAQ based on their founder's history with NFTs, so I worry that this might also be something they're not being truthful about.

Oh for sure, I don't doubt that. The issue that I take is that their FAQ - which I imagine is rarely actually read by users, but is definitely read more often than the ToS - is directly contradicted by their ToS. While they say they only collect one data point in the FAQ, the ToS outlines several other data points they collect. While they say they don't share your collected data with third parties, the ToS states that they may share your collected data with third parties for advertising purposes. The FAQ denies being connected to crypto schemes, despite their founder (Tiffany Zhong) and parent company being heavily involved in crypto.

While these are all standard practices for just about every web platform, it's the lies in the FAQs that should be concerning to users. If they would have just said exactly what they do with your data or what their background is in, or even just not included it in the FAQs at all, I wouldn't have any problem with it. But they're willing to openly lie to their users, and I don't think they should be trusted.

I mean, it feels kinda obvious. If there's any company in this space that would never need to use generative AI, it's Nintendo. They already employ some of the most talented art teams in the industry, they're not exactly struggling to produce art or assets.

If this was from a developer who maybe hasn't been a gaming monolith for the last 30+ years, that'd be different. This is like if Bill Gates says he promises not to open his 401k early; like, okay cool, I don't think that was ever in doubt in the last 30 years, Bill, but thanks for letting us know.

Well, the bears do have a right to be armed, after all.

That's not really what astroturfing is. Astroturfing refers to groups pretending to be a small startup, but are actually organized by and working toward the interests of a larger entity.

For instance, a group of activists may petition their local government to request new laws that restrict how corporations can exploit local water sources, under the guise of environmental protection concerns. But it turns out that activist group is actually owned by Nestle, who are trying to carve out laws that would drive out their competition and do little for the environment.

"Fake grassroots" = astroturf.

We don't need your stinkin' mines!

It can also be context-specific. Sometimes the L can stand for "Lunch", for videos you shouldn't watch while eating or might otherwise trigger a gag reflex (gore, pimple popping, anything with creepy crawlies, etc).

The thing is, this story you mention isn't a situation of trans health care; this is a situation of actual child abuse. The parents literally forced a gender identity onto their child who seems to have otherwise been cisgender. It's not all that different from what conservative parents will often do with their actual trans children.

If anything, this story shows the harms that come by denying gender-affirming care to children. That child was not a girl, and denying him of his identity caused irreparable damage. All because the parents were too scared to tell their child that the doctor fucked up the circumcision.