Bluesky is ushering in a pick-your-own algorithm era of social media

It looks like you can just click through the content warning.

Censorship and moderation aren't the same thing. Cmon folks, this comes up once a month on HN.

You can still see the content, right? So it's just a label, it seems.

There is a cultural divide on where you stand wrt transphobia. The default appview is indeed not down with it, where Twitter is ofc very down with it.

The protocol is ambivalent towards it, so if you seek hate, you could host your own. I'm very fine (happy even) with the bsky team not being invested in that side of history.

So the victim here is the Babylon Bee and not the trans person they are mocking?

You can also just turn it off globally by turning off the "Intolerance" setting on the Bluesky Moderation account - visit @moderation.bsky.app and set it up how you want.

This is such a weird logical hoop that that so many people are eager to jump through.

And what if you just espouse the normal view that all of history & 97% of people currently on earth hold?

Yeah, I just made an account to test this very thing. As a brand new user it was easy to find. Makes you wonder how earnest the complaints are.

I think that's in line with pick-your-own — Bluesky has the concept of ‘labelling service’ (with Bluesky as a/the default labeller) and client actions based on those labels (hide/warn/show).

If that's all that's happening, the really bad part is contributing to the perception that Bluesky is just a left-Gab (and if that's what you want, there are perfectly good Mastodon cliques already).

There used to be a US-politics labeller, of value to non-Americans, but it seems to have fallen over.

It's a pretty understandable semantic argument, where tons of people are going to be irrationally biased in whichever of the two directions suits them on a given example.

I.e. it's not really "weird", is my point.

Which view is that? I highly doubt that there's any view that fits the criteria you just posited.

Sorry, which two directions? Surely you can have more than two distinct opinions on how to best handle moderation. Which is a fatal flaw to the twitter "community notes" feature, too.

Whatever you mean, you can probably write about it without encouraging hatred for groups of people based on qualities that, by themselves, are harmless, like whether they feel male or female, are biologically male or female, are gay or straight, white or black, etc etc.

This is just a thought-terminating cliche.

It seems like it doesn't take much to terminate thought for you.

If you want to suggest that moderation and censorship are the same—two concepts with obviously differing senses in English—take a stab at making the argument instead of just asserting it in, ironically, a cliche.

You can stay on twitter.

Seems that if I write that "X that feels Y is X and not Y", then I'm apparently encouraging hate. But the real point is that I feel descriptions should belong to the person describing, not the person described.. How is this hate?

The victim of censorship is the Babylon Bee, I don't see that trans person being censored.

Yes, and much of it comes down to sexism.

Anyone who looks at Levine and thinks something along the lines of wearing a dress, must be a woman rather than that is obviously a man in a dress has deeply sexist ideas about how women should present themselves.

You can label this as "transphobia" if you like but that's just a tacit acknowledgement that the "trans" belief system is built upon sexist principles.

The problem is that an overwhelming amount of the left label statements not meant to be hateful as hateful, specifically: “there are two genders”.

Everything has been reduced to “hate”, to the point that it actively muddies the waters wrt actual hatred.

why would you say "there are two genders"? You haven't heard of nonbinary gender?[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-binary_gender

That depends on your beliefs.

Some people believe that whether you're a man or a woman is based on thoughts in your head, rather than the material biological reality of your sex. They also believe that these thoughts mean you can be neither woman or man, which they call 'non-binary'.

Of course to everyone else this is a rather absurd thing to believe. Like the healing power of crystals or some nonsense like that.

I disagree. Words have meaning, you can't just use your own personal definitions. The modern definition of "gender" is based on the concept of gender identity and includes more than two genders [0][1]. If you want to make your point understood by most people, you should say "there are two biological sexes", although that is also not correct[2].

[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gender#Noun [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender#dictionary... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

Agreed. I think it is indeed moderation. It's just the moderation that shows how intolerant and how hysterical the left has become.

They aren't censored, though. You can still read their intolerant posts they are just labeled as such.

What people really have a problem with here is that they are called out for the intolerance because it reflects upon them.

Still trying that whole "bigoted anti-trans posts from new hn account" thing, ey?

The dictionary pages you linked to illustrate that there are multiple senses for the word 'gender' in modern use, and that its use as a shorthand for 'gender identity' is not the only one.

Also, as the Wikipedia article you linked discusses, 'intersex' is not a type of sex additional to female and male. It's a word used to group various disorders of sexual development.

The article they posted was a satire on USA Today naming Levine, a man, as one of their Women Of The Year.

This quote from their article highlights the absurdity:

"Levine is the U.S. assistant secretary for health for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, where he serves proudly as the first man in that position to dress like a western cultural stereotype of a woman."

Really the only "intolerance" here is from those who can't stand their ideological beliefs being made fun of, and decide to retaliate via the platform's moderation system.