tatianatrifan.bsky.social
Life is full of surprises, but never when you need one.
Completely allergic to any form of racism, sexism, genderism.
#StandWithUkraine
Views are my own
3,053 posts
4,365 followers
4,687 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
For example, it took 30 minutes for a new account of an adolescent on TikTok to receive eating disorders (thinspiration) content after staring a couple of times at videos about meals. TikTok claims EDs content is never shown to people under 18, yet their algorithms favour this content.
comment in response to
post
That is a bleak view of humans and actually people get radicalised less when they have to choose their content on social media rather than when algorithms choose it for them. That is what studies show: that when people have to work to choose their social media content, they get radicalised less.
comment in response to
post
I have other social media and there, even in the Following feed, there are strong algorithms at work. Some people have their posts suppressed, some content is pushed ahead of other content.
Here, I see all posts and in chronological order, no boosting via likes and other enhancers.
comment in response to
post
For the posts it suggests you in the Discover feed yes, there is an algorithm, there it is normal, but I didn't see rage baiting or radicalisation spiral like elsewhere. For the feeds you organise yourself via lists you pin to the feed, there is no algorithm, only in chronological order.
comment in response to
post
Due to the risk of online misinformation spreading fast and online radicalisation happening due to algorithms that favour rage baiting and engagement over safety, social media with very few algorithms is a good thing for a responsible consumption of social media. It teaches one how to chose content.
comment in response to
post
I am surprised how much disinformation regarding long covid there is, and how much such disinformation is propagated on Bluesky by people who think they are allies, but spread the same misinformation based on debunked studies that are basically using pseudoscience.
It is quite a challenge.
comment in response to
post
They went back to PACE, CBT+GET again.
How can they even separate what is organ damage and what isn't, when nervous system damage should be entering the category of organ damage and gaslighting sick people into thinking they are healthy but unwilling to be physically active is just more abuse?
comment in response to
post
This is how my feeds menu looks, based on my interests: various feeds that I made via making lists with accounts based on different interests I have.
Sometimes I spend a whole week on only one feed, for example science magazines, if political events are too much.
comment in response to
post
You can also make lists with accounts you follow based on interests, pin those lists to your feeds menu and then spend time in any of those lists.
I did that and my experience here is a good one.
It needs a bit of personal effort, but that is a good thing as it makes you work for your experience.
comment in response to
post
BTW, the text above is not meant in any way to discriminate against the trans community, we need more studies to be inclusive, it is a comment on the absurdity of not understanding that bundling up everyone in a study and not doing studies aimed at a specific group is rather regressive.
comment in response to
post
BTW, the text above is not meant in any way to discriminate against the trans community, we need more studies to be inclusive, it is a comment on the absurdity of not understanding that bundling up everyone in a study and not doing studies aimed at a specific group is rather regressive.
comment in response to
post
BTW, the text above is not meant in any way to discriminate against the trans community, we need more studies to be inclusive, it is a comment on the absurdity of not understanding that bundling up everyone in a study and not doing studies aimed at a specific group is rather regressive.
comment in response to
post
So anthropology should check sex hormones to describe culture according to you as otherwise isn't science? What has metabolism to do with social norms?
You are becoming ridiculous here and I will stop this conversation with you.
comment in response to
post
You deviated severely from the topic of the original post and you are pushing to topics that interest you.
You do not realise that you cannot do a study on manosphere and incels including women in it because women are not part of those groups that need researching as they do harm the society?
comment in response to
post
You also included sex hormones in there together with cultural norms, and why would you condition some fields with that?
comment in response to
post
It isn't as "established" as you claim it is, studies on long covid are still coming and many more answers are needed. Health care is uninformed about long covid.
Do you have a PhD? I am just curious because you speak in a language that it is not scientific per se, with all those certainties.
comment in response to
post
Wow, now you toss to the trash a big chunk of science that looks at language, social media behaviours, radicalisation, etc. Anthropology is not a science by your standards. Good to know.
Good that you are a gatekeeper of what science is according to you.
comment in response to
post
You repost often about long covid. The lack of treatments for post viral illness is the very result of decades of not including women in medical studies, not doing analyses by sex in case women were included, and having women's health ignored as they were seen as smaller men with pesky hormones.
comment in response to
post
That is an absurd take, scientifically speaking, as it is not that a gender is better or worse than the other, it is that there are gender and sex specific problems.
We gained more knowledge in behavioural sciences and in medicine by checking for the influence of sex.
You ask a regression of science
comment in response to
post
Yes, indeed.
Brian Deer's articles in BMJ are spot on regarding the many facets of corruption in which Wakefield was involved.
Including conflicts of interest, as he was developing a separate vaccines for measles and he wanted to destroy the credibility of the MMR vaccine with a fraudulent study.
comment in response to
post
He anyway has a bunch of far-righters following him there now and he needs to feed them, and it is difficult for an attention troll like him not to get radicalised on Xitter.
I am so sorry that, in his mercantile and infantile pursuit for social media clout he put you in harm's way.