arcterus
@arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
Mm, sounds about what I'd expect of you.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
Just doing my part to provide as little empathy to you as you provide to others.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
Compared to other competitive swimmers, yes, he was. 500th ranked in just the USA college system means you're never getting anywhere close to being a professional swimmer competing at world championships or the olympics. Never. Not even close.
You really love ignoring everything other than the 500 free.
Since you brought up the Olympics, I wonder how many of her competitors (other than obviously Douglass) actually made it.
Incorrect.
Unless you're talking about pretty much worthless pool records, I am indeed correct. Since you love calling me incorrect, how about you actually provide some numbers other than an unsubstantiated ranking from a letter written by someone supposedly om behalf of anomymous teammates. She did not set NCAA records, USA records, etc., unlike someone else she competed against.
Grow up.
Right back at you, ma'am.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
Where?
I literally wrote in the parenthetical which term you used. Are you blind?
Went from a "bad" mens swimmer to the best womens swimmer while swimming basically the same times as pre-transition. There's nothing to say that even if Lia didn't "transition" that he would have improved his times.
I think I'm done. You're just repeating conservative talking points without actually thinking about what you're writing. Lia Thomas was never a bad swimmer. As mentioned, the improvement in her rankings was within normal bounds for three years. You've also curiously avoided noticing how the other rankings were below 1st despite her starting at a higher ranking in men's competitions. Likewise, none of her times have ever blown away the competition. She didn't set records. The 1st place finish isn't even in the top 50 all-time for NCAA.
I feel like I'm talking with my relatives who voted for Trump. Given that you don't even have the decency to use the correct pronouns, kindly go fuck yourself conservacuck.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
It's obvious you don't actually have a researched opinion since you just used the wrong term for a trans woman (they said trans men, in case they edit it).
You seem to, once again, be ignoring that on top of the decrease from transitioning, they are still a human being, and thus age and practice like any other human being. From sophomore year to their redshirt senior year, they grew, trained, etc. like any athlete. Expecting them to just drop 15% or whatever from their sophomore time and never improve from that is completely idiotic.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
The numbers you are using I've only seen from that letter made by people complaining about her, frequently posted everywhere by conservative sources. Also, it's fucking obvious she'd have slower times. That is the entire purpose of requiring trans atheletes to be on hormones for a couple years.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
She swam for the men's team 2019-2020 while undergoing hormone therapy. Then there was a year break because of COVID. Then she swam for the women's team 2021-2022. That's a two year break.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 1 week ago:
It should also be noted that a college athlete's times and rankings would presumably improve every year. Freshmen competing against seniors are just less likely to win (in most sports at least). IIRC I saw an analysis of her rankings that indicated the improvement was within normal bounds for year-over-year improvement.
- Comment on GrapheneOS Under Threat: EU Age Verification And Google Changes Endanger Privacy-Focused Android 2 weeks ago:
I personally don't think that's really feasible unless they provide smartphones for every citizen themselves, and even then people like my grandparents would basically not be able to live given that they only barely know how to message me (and even that they do wrong sometimes, so...). They can certainly make it difficult without a smartphone, but they likely can't completely eliminate physical IDs until those issues are gone.
- Comment on GrapheneOS Under Threat: EU Age Verification And Google Changes Endanger Privacy-Focused Android 2 weeks ago:
While it'd be difficult, you can usually make do with a browser or visiting in-person (e.g. with a bank, they need to know who you are anyway, so visiting in-person is mostly just an inconvenience). Physical ID is likely still going to be a thing for the forseeable future since at minimum there are bunch of old people who basically don't know how to use smartphones (or at least use them well).
Messaging is more problematic. You could probably use a combination of something that functions on your computer and a dumb phone for urgent things (although since messages/calls wouldn't be E2EE, you'd have to assume the govt knows the contents of the convo).
IMO it's entirely feasible just quite inconvenient.
- Comment on GrapheneOS Under Threat: EU Age Verification And Google Changes Endanger Privacy-Focused Android 2 weeks ago:
If govts actually start making stuff like grapheneos illegal, maybe I'll just stop using smartphones. If they're gonna be that blatant about wanting to be a surveillance state, then I see little reason to help them.
- Comment on Anon witnesses excellent security 5 weeks ago:
Whenever I hear about shit like this I wonder if I should just start a company and package free software lol. Could like donate a bunch of the profit to the actual projects.