alot of us in that millenial range who were “spared” the diagnosis or just missed, are less likely to fight doctors on the topic as well. more doctors are better informed on newer information about autism. add to that, some of us paying attention to that information and expecting better lives for our kids then we or our undiagnosed parents got.

my mom spent the first 3 years after my sons diagnosis sending me lists of reasons i should give the doctors to say they were wrong. that finally stopped when she “offered parenting advice” on getting him to stop some visible stims. i stopped humoring her perspective and started silently making way too intesne eye contact inwas forced to learn, with no expression, until she got uncomfortable and left. for decades after “discovering” autistics existed, there were fewer autistics because we said there were fewer autistics.

the article ends on a pitch for an ai bot making your paid posts. it’s trash. the article itself is the kind of lazy trash you get when you start leaning into monitization. you’re right, the fediverse isnt a monolith, not even inside distinct cultural regions.

for me at least. the answer to more media like this article appearing. so we grow an have more content and grow more. will be finding somewhere else to be. thats just the social media cycle. something cool gets made. a community starts forming. someone says “look at those idiots. dont they know how money works? a few of them could be making so much of it. i’ll show them how and make some myself too”. the rough edges of the space get smoothed out because if you want to make the site sucessful it should look more like how the sucessful spaces look. and a bunch of people move on to make something new again while bots have arguments with bots.

creators are welcome to post in the fediverse and tag their paid platform so long as they respect the rules of whatever community they post in. everyone has to eat. turning the fediverse into a tansactional platform is just coporate social media with extra steps. the articles getting downvoted because its one step shy of a linkedin ad disguised as a post. if i wanted to read posts about the beauty of the grind or some other nonsese, i’d be on fucking twitter or facebook. this place exists specifically to not be those places.

It’s this uninvited commenting on the bots part that has me downvoting it. It’s presenting itself at an authority here. If a user in the comments called the bot to fact check something and the bot did a bad job, i’d just block the bot. I’d even be able to look over that users history to get an idea of the bot’s purpose. But this bot comes in and says “here’s the truth”, then spits out something i’d expect to see on twitters current itteration.

If the problem you’re trying to solve is the reliability of the media being posted here. Take the left/right bias call out and find a decent databse on new source quality. Start the bots post out with resources for people to develop their own skill at spotting bad news content.

If the problem you’re trying to solve is the visibility of political bias in content posted here. So the down vote button isnt acting as a proxy for that. Adding a function for the community to rate left/right lean like rotten tomatoes sounds interesting, so long as you take the reliability rating out of the bot. You can’t address both media reliability and political bias in one automated post. nyt and npr being too pearl clutchy for my taste. and some outlet that exists only on facebook having the same assumed credibility as the associated press. are wildly different issues.

*stupid phone, i’ll live with the spelling but not repeated words.

“it’s possible i buried a self delete timebomb in one of our repos years ago. enjoy looking for it just incase assholes”

this is how i see other sysadmins when they explain their 30yr old bash script that does everything.