I admitted there are edge cases.

Then it's not binary.

When you flip a coin, there is a chance that it will land on the side, yet we still use a coin flip for a 50:50 probability scenario because it is close enough.

Absolutely. For day to day life, "there are two outcomes" is safe way to describe coin flips. But given that a coin landing on its side can happen, it's not a binary system. It only becomes binary when we ignore the edge cases. Just like sex...

And that's before we get to the point that there isn't even a single definition of sex that accounts for all scenarios. People can change their legal sex, people can change their morphological sex, "genetic sex" isn't foolproof, as it doesn't always correlate with morphological sexual characteristics, or even gamete production.

Calling sex binary is either a generalisation, or something you want to be true. At no point is it reality of the situation though...

It is a binary with some edge cases

So in other words, not a binary? What you're describing is more accurately described as a bimodal distribution.

Her comment was meant as black and white. To use your analogy, she would be arguing that 6 wheeled cars don't exist, and insisting that all vehicles have two or four wheels, and that's how we distinguish them

Games with cyber psychosis tend not to have androids, as they blunt the impact of exploring the stories of people who replace more and more of themselves with cyberware and lose their humanity as they do it.

So the androids that have existed in the various version of cyberpunk over the years have all been some variant of replacing your body with chrome, whilst leaving at least some part of your original brain behind to drive it.

So, my typical process looks like this

• Exposure I normally leave as is, preferring to use other modules to fix exposure issues. There are exceptions, but generally, I leave this module alone on its "scene referred" default
• I apply haze removal, chromatic aberration, lens correction, denoise (profiled) and raw chromatic aberration without modification, though I will sometimes leave out haze removal if the image is high contrast straight out of the camera
• Tone equalizer, I tend to set to "contrast tone curve: soft", but again, this one will get adjusted as needed.
• Local contrast. I always use this, mostly on "clarity" , but I will use HDR tone mapping if it's a backlit subject or the like
• Sharpen. I rarely use it, as most of my photos are done with pro glass these days, but if I've used a tele converter or the like, I'll sometimes use this modeule
• Colour Balance RGB. This is where I do most of my work. Up until now, I've use presets, but here, I use either "standard" or "vivid" as my starting point, before tinkering. For all of my adjustments here, I use the "RGB parade" panel (rather than a histogram) to watch the exposure and colour balance. I typically start on the 4 way tab, and adjust "power" and "shadows lift". Then on the master tab, I'll adjust the perceptual brilliance grading. This is where I correct any remaining exposure issues, and to some extent, contrast issues. Then, I'll play with vibrance and contrast a little, just to tweak the final result.
• If I am really struggling with a poorly lit subject, or a contrasty background with a non contrasty subject, I'll create a second (and sometimes even a third) Colour Balance RGB module, and use "drawn and parametric masks" to selectively adjust the areas I need. The killer secret to make this work is after you've selected your area, increase the feathering to smooth it out and blur it, and then increase the mask contrast, to make it respect borders. I find that tweaking these is best done with the mask preview turned off.
• Finally, if I'm not happy with the temperature/colour cast, I'll use the "colour correction" module. This one is display referred rather than scene referred, so I always leave it until last. There are other options for adjusting this, but I find the ease of moving the offset point around the colour map too efficient to pass up. I can quickly move through a lot of options and find the value that looks best.

I think I'm the only darktable user to not use filmic rgb :)

@wolfinthewoods@lemmy.ml @chetradley@lemm.ee

This is going to look great in my memoir. A plastic robot on all fours, mooning me as it clambers to get up. My, covered in half a rubbish truck full of shit and vomit, and the bird guy, hanging upside down, attacked by birds.

And what kind of super power is that anyway? The ability to get attacked by birds? But hey, who am I to talk? I can be attacked by dust bunnies on demand!

Ok Sparkie, stay focused! New plan! Get this shit off me, and help the bird guy. This is why I always carry empty batters with me!

I gather a handful of batteries, and dump all of my excess charge in to them, and chuck them at the robots butt

If this were a movie, the batteries would explode or something, but in reality the best I can hope for is some of the shit comes off of me and sticks to the batteries, letting me get free! If this were a super hero comedy, the battery, covered in shit, would get stuck in the robots butt! Lifes a joke right? Can this be a super hero comdey?

Action: I dump my excess charge in to a handful of batteries and throw them at the robots butt, hoping to plug it with gunk, free myself of some of the gunk at the same time, before trying to run towards bird guy!

Reasons it will succeed: I am carrying empty batteries for just this moment. The robot is on all fours on the ground, and I'm right behind it!

Roll: 4 before modifiers

I don't understand how Kaliya's statements can be controversial or classed as transphobia

That's because it's mostly dog whistles and wedge tactics. It's a rehashing of common transphobic talking points, but with the edges brushed off. It's the way transphobia is portrayed to appear reasonable at first glance.

The dog whistles are easy to miss if you aren't familiar with them, but the sheer volume of them from her shows that they were absolutely intended. This isn't accidentally repeating something, this is an active relisting of transphobic talking points predominantly utilised by transphobic groups.

Sex isn’t a “gender orientation” it is really simple biology.

There are unspoken parts to this. What she really means here, even though she doesn't explicitly say it, is that sex is real, and thus gender isn't, and because of that, sex is more important than gender. It's the way transphobic folk often phrase things so they can have a facade of acceptance, whilst still being transphobic. "I'm not questioning your gender, but you're still male and should be denied space

Sex and gender might be distinct, but they're related, often conflated and neither are inherently static, binary or immutable. Any attempt to draw a hard line between them, or to point at a dictionary definition is normally always said with the goal of validating exclusion, and that's what is happening here.

Gamete size – its really simple.

This is a regular talking point used by transphobic groups. It is said precisely for the reasons I mentioned above. It's an attempt to make a black and white, one sized fits all definition. And the reason that TERFs use it, is because to them, it's a "gotcha" definition that allows them to exclude trans folk from spaces. And those reasons are there, but unspoken when Kaliya wrote that.

Stop confusing young autistic vulnerable people.

This is also a straight up transphobic talking point. It comes from transphobic literature that paints transgender identity as a form of social contagion, whilst also implying that autistic folk are more vulnerable to this social contagion. The specific context in which it is normally used by these transphobic groups is when talking about young trans men, by portraying them instead as vulnerable young girls.

You think it IS moral to have male-bodied people who identify as trans women playing in elite comparative sport for female-bodied people?

This is more dog whistle transphobia. The big give away here is that she can't even give trans women the validity of their own identity. She defines trans women first as "male bodied" and secondly as "identitying as trans women". There is a transphobic term "TIM", that transphobes use as a slur against trans women. It means "trans identified male". Transphobes like it, because it is a masculine name, and because it defines their identity as being male, whilst implying that the trans part is less real. The word "identified" here implies it is a phase, or a deceit.

This comment from Kaliya is using that exact concept, but just skipping the acronym.

Gender can be socially-constructed.

Sure. Parts of it can be, and are socially constructed. But what she is really saying here is that gender isn't as real as sex.

There are only two sexes.

See my earlier comment. When you try and make things black and white, and use strict definitions, generally, the reason for doing so is to validate a push for exclusion, which is exactly what this is.

Telling male children who have feminine tights they must be female is what is happening and it is hurting boys.

Once more, portraying trans identity as social contagion.

culture has gone competely bonkers confusing sex and gender.

Explicitly transphobic. Portrays trans folk as "bonkers".

Which is a lot of words to say, she's a transphobe, and she is rehashing transphobic talking points, but framing them in such a way that the transphobia isn't immediately obvious to folks who aren't familiar with trans and gender diverse folk.

You can add another mod, and then step down to transfer ownership. If you want to still be a mod after that, the new owner will have to add you, or the admin of the instance the community is hosted on

As long as you're not trying for leaderboards, the only thing that matters is what it means for your own training

I'll generate a new one. We put a limit on how many times they can be used so we don't get spam bot waves

kind of how AOSP is for Android)

https://9to5google.com/2025/03/28/google-android-aosp-changes-announcement/

You don't "confirm" it. It's an attempt to describe a system/outcome. It's a model of a system, not the system itself and no model is perfect, because all models are our attempt to understand and describe things, and there is no such thing as perfect understanding.

However, it's a highly accurate model, that explains things very well. So, either we will find that one day, we make a brand new, better model (this seems unlikely given the accuracy of the current model, but possible). Or, more likely, we continue to come to a better understanding of the system, and improve the model we use to describe it.