noirsongbird

[noirsongbird]

GOG is taking a stand against payment processors caving to fundamentalist religious groups and is offering a bunch of "banned" games for free. (via Ashley Lynch on bsky)

[noirsongbird]

[noirsongbird]

If you want to fight encroaching censorship you absolutely, postively must become comfortable with telling people you watch porn. I'm fucking serious.

[noirsongbird]

when a film or tv show takes place somewhere where you have been, it is your sacred duty as viewer to say “i’ve been there” every time you recognize a place

[noirsongbird]

honestly the discourse on this site is so bad that I have a new hot take: if you use tumblr at all fuck you

[noirsongbird]

The queen of dubious Hollywood plagiarism cases is Sophia Stewart. She's the woman who The Matrix and The Terminator were stolen from, if you've heard that legend; she won a billion dollars and her victory over the studios was so big it was only ever reported by...the college paper of Salt Lake Community College. In truth she didn't win the case, she won the right to not have it dismissed, which it eventually was when she failed to show up.

Like, she wasn't claiming The Matrix and The Terminator were stolen from her work as a whole; she claimed they were stolen from the same story, even though the only real similarity they have is "robots destroyed the Earth and there's human rebels". How can this be? Well the story was unpublished in the 80s. But you can buy it now! ...but that version's from after she made her case, so who knows if it looks like the original. The Amazon reviews include a lot of glowing ones from people without avatars, and a lot of one star ones from people who seem to exist saying that it's more or less a plot outline and the majority of the book is just legal documents

But you don't have to dig into that bc she claims she sent it to a contest for story ideas run by the Wachowskis. In 1986. When they were not only not filmmakers, but a teenager and in college respectively. That's ten years before they made their first feature film, and she claims they were running a contest for story ideas in a national magazine she cannot name, even though she obsessively documents every other aspect of the plagiarism case. You literally don't have to look up any other facet of her argument: this one basic fact making no sense chronologically, and being the only element she can't produce, lets you dismiss the rest. The Wachowskis simply were not running national filmmaking competitions when they were in college

And yet! It spreads. It still spreads. When the fourth Matrix movie came out there were "Actually, the Wachowskis stole The Matrix from an African-American woman" reminders everywhere. It spreads on TikTok, Twitter, and even Tumblr. All from people who haven't actually tried looking up her story, and who are going off a Utah community college paper's misinterpretation that her slightly delaying losing her case was somehow her winning billions. It sounds good, and that's all that matters

[noirsongbird]

in honor of 4chan exploding, I want to remind you all that they used to do “raids” on Tumblr.

they tried to flood the popular tags with gore and porn. this was when Homestuck was at its peak, so they were a target too. (side note: tags barely functioned at all at this point so trying to make them useless was like throwing a molotov into an already burning building but try telling that to 4channers)

but the Homestuck fandom was ready and countered by flooding the tag with weirder, more explicit Homestuck porn and gore.

to the point that the trolls themselves got weirded out, fucked off, and never attempted a “raid” again.

everyone moved on but I stayed there because that is one of the funniest fucking things to happen on this website.

[noirsongbird]

every time someone calls a cis man an egg because he decides to deviate even slightly from traditional masculine gender norms, an angel loses its wings

[noirsongbird]

Another reason to ignore negative comments (especially on AO3)

So at work I’ve been forced to learn about “AI Agentic Workflows”. But being an AO3 author, I couldn’t help but think of how this technology affects authors on AO3 (and honestly on other social media platforms too).

What I learned was this: Agentic AI workflow software makes it extremely easy to automate, and bulk-post, HIGHLY-STORY-SPECIFIC negative comments to AO3 fics.

If you’re not familiar with what an AI Agentic Workflow is, I highly recommend informing yourself. You’ll be hearing it a LOT very soon. Basically, it’s a linked linked chain of AI prompts on one/many software platforms. Each “agent” completes a task. Then it hands off the completed task to the next AI Agent in the chain, which builds on it. Then that result is handed off to another agent, etc etc, even potentially to a final agent which analyzes what worked well and what didn’t, and changes what the other agents do.

There are a ton of repercussions here.

But let’s stay focused on AO3.

With AI Agentic workflow software, a person/group who wants to silence the voice of a community can easily scrape a tag, analyze stories by the thousands, then post thousands of highly customized, story specific negative comments, all without a human being ever seeing your words.

They could even set up AI agents watching to see if you delete your story, or delete your profile, which would be a marker of success. That success marker could be shared back to the other AI agents, and the whole workflow could be changed via automation to use that more effective approach.

I’m sure the OTF is working on ways of stopping this. I’m sure most social media companies are too.

But as usual the tools to create havoc are ahead of the ones to prevent havoc.

Anyway.

TL;DR: If you get a highly-story-specific negative AO3 comment — it does NOT MEAN it was written by a HUMAN! You were probably just story 20,031 in a scraped database of 50,000 stories, all of which were being targeted because they belong to a group/topic/tag that some shitty group or agency wanted to silence because of their horrible political or social.

Don’t let them silence you. They never looked at your words to begin with.

[noirsongbird]

“no one’s ever mad at me unless they tell me so” is the best assumption i’ve ever made

[noirsongbird]

I just think it's so darkly comedic and on-brand that leftists are already coming up with excuses for why they'll sit on their asses in 2028. "I'd rather have Vance than Newsom" okay, then you'll get President Vance then lmao.

[noirsongbird]

Pokemon headcanon that once Absol are studied and people realize they prevent disasters instead of causing them, particularly dangerous workplaces get themselves a workplace Absol and it also decreases accidents.

Construction sites and fishing ships and factories will have one that pretty much just lazes about until it just gets up howling one day and knocks a dude down. They almost never figure out what would have happened but they're always like "yes absol thank you absol I am so grateful to be on the floor right now. Can I offer you a treat in this trying time"

[noirsongbird]

Josh Johnson's delivery is so funny 😭

[noirsongbird]

distressing things to say to your friends

[noirsongbird]

Annual Lollapalooza Line Up Game

[noirsongbird]

AO3 Ship Stats: Year In Bad Data

You may have seen this AO3 Year In Review.

It hasn’t crossed my tumblr dash but it sure is circulating on twitter with 3.5M views, 10K likes, 17K retweets and counting. Normally this would be great! I love data and charts and comparisons!

Except this data is GARBAGE and belongs in the TRASH.

I first noticed something fishy when I realized that Steve/Bucky – the 5th largest ship on AO3 by total fic count – wasn’t on this Top 100 list anywhere. I know Marvel’s popularity has fallen in recent years, but not that much. Especially considering some of the other ships that made it on the list. You mean to tell me a femslash HP ship (Mary MacDonald/Lily Potter) in which one half of the pairing was so minor I had to look up her name because she was only mentioned once in a single flashback scene beat fandom juggernaut Stucky? I call bullshit.

Now obviously jumping to conclusions based on gut instinct alone is horrible practice... but it is a good place to start. So let’s look at the actual numbers and discover why this entire dataset sits on a throne of lies.

Here are the results of filtering the Steve/Bucky tag for all works created between Jan 1, 2023 and Dec 31, 2023:

Not only would that place Steve/Bucky at #23 on this list, if the other counts are correct (hint: they're not), it’s also well above the 1520-new-work cutoff of the #100 spot. So how the fuck is it not on the list? Let’s check out the author’s FAQ to see if there’s some important factor we’re missing.

The first thing you’ll probably notice in the FAQ is that the data is being scraped from publicly available works. That means anything privated and only accessible to logged-in users isn’t counted. This is Sin #1. Already the data is inaccurate because we’re not actually counting all of the published fics, but the bots needed to do data collection on this scale can't easily scrape privated fics so I kinda get it. We’ll roll with this for now and see if it at least makes the numbers make more sense:

Nope. Logging out only reduced the total by a couple hundred. Even if one were to choose the most restrictive possible definition of "new works" and filter out all crossovers and incomplete fics, Steve/Bucky would still have a yearly total of 2,305. Yet the list claims their total is somewhere below 1,500? What the fuck is going on here?

Let’s look at another ship for comparison. This time one that’s very recent and popular enough to make it on the list so we have an actual reference value for comparison: Nick/Charlie (Heartstopper). According to the list, this ship sits at #34 this year with a total of 2630 new works. But what’s AO3 say?

Off by a hundred or so but the values are much closer at least!

If we dig further into the FAQ though we discover Sin #2 (and the most egregious): the counting method. The yearly fic counts are NOT determined by filtering for a certain time period, they’re determined by simply taking a snapshot of the total number of fics in a ship tag at the end of the year and subtracting the previous end-of-year total. For example, if you check a ship tag on Jan 1, 2023 and it has 10,000 fics and check it again on Jan 1, 2024 and it now has 12,000 fics, the difference (2,000) would be the number of "new works" on this chart.

At first glance this subtraction method might seem like a perfectly valid way to count fics, and it’s certainly the easiest way, but it can and did have major consequences to the point of making the entire dataset functionally meaningless. Why? If any older works are deleted or privated, every single one of those will be subtracted from the current year fic count. And to make the problem even worse, beginning at the end of last year there was a big scare about AI scraping fics from AO3, which caused hundreds, if not thousands, of users to lock down their fics or delete them.

The magnitude of this fuck up may not be immediately obvious so let’s look at an example to see how this works in practice.

Say we have two ships. Ship A is more than a decade old with a large fanbase. Ship B is only a couple years old but gaining traction. On Jan 1, 2023, Ship A had a catalog of 50,000 fics and ship B had 5,000. Both ships have 3,000 new works published in 2023. However, 4% of the older works in each fandom were either privated or deleted during that same time (this percentage is was just chosen to make the math easy but it’s close to reality).

Ship A: 50,000 x 4% = 2,000 removed works Ship B: 5,000 x 4% = 200 removed works

Ship A: 3,000 - 2,000 = 1,000 "new" works Ship B: 3,000 - 200 = 2,800 "new" works

This gives Ship A a net gain of 1,000 and Ship B a net gain of 2,800 despite both fandoms producing the exact same number of new works that year. And neither one of these reported counts are the actual new works count (3,000). THIS explains the drastic difference in ranking between a ship like Steve/Bucky and Nick/Charlie.

How is this a useful measure of anything? You can't draw any conclusions about the current size and popularity of a fandom based on this data.

With this system, not only is the reported "new works" count incorrect, the older, larger fandom will always be punished and it’s count disproportionately reduced simply for the sin of being an older, larger fandom. This example doesn’t even take into account that people are going to be way more likely to delete an old fic they're no longer proud of in a fandom they no longer care about than a fic that was just written, so the deletion percentage for the older fandom should theoretically be even larger in comparison.

And if that wasn't bad enough, the author of this "study" KNEW the data was tainted and chose to present it as meaningful anyway. You will only find this if you click through to the FAQ and read about the author’s methodology, something 99.99% of people will NOT do (and even those who do may not understand the true significance of this problem):

The author may try to argue their post states that the tags "which had the greatest gain in total public fanworks” are shown on the chart, which makes it not a lie, but a error on the viewer’s part in not interpreting their data correctly. This is bullshit. Their chart CLEARLY titles the fic count column “New Works” which it explicitly is NOT, by their own admission! It should be titled “Net Gain in Works” or something similar.

Even if it were correctly titled though, the general public would not understand the difference, would interpret the numbers as new works anyway (because net gain is functionally meaningless as we've just discovered), and would base conclusions on their incorrect assumptions. There’s no getting around that… other than doing the counts correctly in the first place. This would be a much larger task but I strongly believe you shouldn’t take on a project like this if you can’t do it right.

To sum up, just because someone put a lot of work into gathering data and making a nice color-coded chart, doesn’t mean the data is GOOD or VALUABLE.

[noirsongbird]

Once, there was a Japanese monk who had a little personal superstition.

Every time he travelled to a new location, he’d find some wood that grew there and make it into a staff to defend himself from any bandits or ne'er-do-wells who attacked him.

He was convinced that the staff, being more in tune with his surroundings, would serve him better in a fight. One day, he explained this to a scholarly friend, who decided to do some investigating.

The scholar started swapping the monk’s staves while he was asleep. Some days, the monk would be using a staff he thought was from where he was, but wasn’t; some days he’d believe it was from elsewhere, when in fact it was the correct staff for where he was; and some days belief and truth would match.

Interestingly, the scholar discovered that it was the monk's belief that mattered - whichever staff he was using, if he thought it matched his surroundings he’d do a little better, and if he thought it didn’t he’d do a little worse.

Of course, since then there have been many more rigorous studies, but that scholar’s treatise remains one of the most important works in shaping human understanding of the place-bo effect.