That statement is not supported by plenty of scientific research. One of the problems is that organizations like WPATH suppress any research that contradicts the trans narrative, and publish poor studies that support it.
The problem is that things like the USA's recent Equality Act go as far as to define sex in terms of gender identity. Trans activists are encouraging the equation of gender and sex. They want to say that people can identify as male or female because "male bodies" and "female bodies" are just a matter of perspective.
"Transwomen" are just males, i.e. men. They have male biology. This is not frivolous, and not up for debate: it's extremely important that we do not lose the ability to talk about human sexuality in a coherent way.
> Indeed, some trans women need to see a gynecologist, even.
This is also not true. No transwomen ever needs to see a gynecologist except as a form of validation.
This video contains at least one lawyer from the ACLU, Chase Strangio, claiming that there is no such thing as a "male body" or "female body". They absolutely are against the idea of sexual dimorphism. This video is accompanied by many other articles all arguing that transwomen are "female" because they say so, and therefore should be allowed in women's sex segregated spaces, sports etc.
Since "respecting the identities of trans people" is a euphemism for "deny the existence of biological sex", I'm happy to be called a bigot.
> Today
@heritage
will critique gender identity
@UN_CSW
because powerful nations are pressing for the radical redefining of sex. If they can change the definition of women to include men, they can erase efforts to empower women economically, socially, and politically. #CSW63
That tweet does not say anything like "trans people don't exist", or that they should be harmed in any way, or that they aren't human. That tweet expresses a perfectly reasonable sentiment that many others share: that human beings are sexually dimorphic and cannot change sex. This sort of hyperbole on the part of transactivists is very frustrating: anyone who doesn't agree with extremist gender ideology is painted as a "bigot".
This is more important than one AI ethics panel with questionable authority. Google is in a position to censor and influence a huge amount of speech on the internet, and the fact that they were targeted by and arguably caved to a small extremist group is very troubling.
> This is not that nuanced argument. I can assure you no one that is trans "pretends" to be a woman for sports records. That comment (as well as the word choice of "disgusting") shows a severe lack of understanding of trans people.
They may not view their own activity as "pretending" to be women, but the position of people like Kay Cole James (and many others, on both the left and right) is that they are simply not women. Whether or not they believe it about themselves is irrelevant.
> Today @heritage will critique gender identity @UN_CSW because powerful nations are pressing for the radical redefining of sex. If they can change the definition of women to include men, they can erase efforts to empower women economically, socially, and politically. #CSW63
There are many other people who are saying the same thing about gender identity. It's strange that Vox describes this as "a particular cause for concern". It's not about "dehumanizing" trans people, it's about self-identification not being a valid basis for a law. If the Equality Act passes as written then the addition of gender identity would effectively remove sex as a protected characteristic.
It doesn't look like this board was a very good idea if the members were not okay with the first sign of disagreement. Will Google's actual AI projects even listen to this group at this point? It reminds me of AMP claiming to have a community driving the specification when in reality Google is just going to do whatever they want.
> Their model used 256 of Google's Cloud TPU v3, though I've not seen training durations. The TPU v3 is only available individually outside of @Google (though @OpenAI likely got special dispensation) which means you'd be paying $8 * 256 = $2048 per hour.
The framing here is really disingenuous. Being concerned about men who "identify" as women being allowed in women's sport is completely reasonable and not mere "resentment". There are real physical differences between men and women, such as bone density, muscle density, lung capacity, heart size, etc that are not undone by hormone therapy or reassignment surgery, and certainly not by self-identification. Navratilova is completely correct, and I'm really shocked that anyone could portray her comments as "transphobic".
Easy fix: ask for sex instead of gender. 3 options: male, female, won't state. Genuine intersex people are incredibly rare and have faced this choice many times before and will just choose the one they feel comfortable with; it won't actually affect your stats too much.
I don't have a clue about VR stuff, and this is the first time I'm hearing about "Firefox Reality". Why do you need a special browser? What's different about this one?
You don't redownload it every time. If your browser cache gets removed then so does the game. Is your browser cache getting removed every time? This just strikes me as a really strange thing to say.
I understand this video is long but it goes in to detail as to why the "scientific research" has been, well, doctored: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mtQ1geeD_c