#TheConversation.Com

[xtruss]

Billions of Cicadas Are Emerging, From Cape Cod To North Georgia – Here’s How And Why We Map Them

— Thursday May 22, 2025 | The Conversation

Three Cicadas in North Carolina During the 2003 Brood IX Emergence. Chris Simon, CC BY-ND

If they’re in your area, you’ll know it from their loud droning, chirping and buzzing sounds. Cicadas from Brood XIV – one of the largest groups of cicadas that emerge from underground on a 13-year or 17-year cycle – are surfacing in May and June 2025 across 12 states. This large-scale biological event reaches from northern Georgia up into Indiana and Ohio and eastward through the mid-Atlantic, extending as far north as Long Island, N.Y. and Massachusetts.

Through mid-June, wooded areas will ring with cicadas’ loud mating calls. After mating, each female will lay hundreds of eggs inside small tree branches. Then the adult cicadas will die. When the eggs hatch six weeks later, new cicada nymphs will fall from the trees and burrow back underground, starting the cycle again.

We are evolutionary ecologists who study periodical cicadas to understand questions about the natural history, genetics and geographic distribution of life. This work starts with mapping where they appear.

We’ve been doing this for decades, updating a process begun by entomologists in the mid-1800s. Our latest maps are published online and searchable.

Periodical Cicadas Emerge on 13- or 17-Year Cycles in Enormous Numbers, Which Increases Their Odds of Finding Mates and Avoiding Predators Long Enough to Reproduce.

Mapping the presence of such a noisy species might seem straightforward, but it’s actually complex. And accuracy matters because there are seven species of periodical cicadas — four with 13-year life cycles and three with 17-year cycles. Different broods can share boundaries, and some cicadas that emerge this year may be members of broods other than XIV, coming out early or late.

A lot of work goes into verifying the data in our maps so that they show the status of these unique insects as accurately as possible. Here’s a look at the process, and at how you can contribute:

Refining Past Records

We first started creating our maps on paper by collecting all known specimen records of 13- and 17-year periodical cicadas from past scientific studies and museums large and small across the eastern U.S., where these broods are located. For centuries, museum specimens have been the gold standard for documenting the presence of a species.

But past standards for labeling specimens were different. Many old museum labels simply noted very approximate locations where specimens were collected. Sometimes they just recorded the city, county or state.

Today we collect our records along roads. We listen for species-specific songs and then record the cicada species identity on computers, with their GPS locations. Often we’ll stop to examine a patch of forest. If the cicadas are singing, we note whether the chorus is light, moderate, loud or distant.

If stormy weather damps down the cicada songs, we look for signs of emergence, such as cast-off skins, adult cicadas on plants, or egg scars on branches.

Dozens of Small Brown Cicadas Climb Grass Stems During a Brood VIII Emergence in Rector, Pa. Chris Simon, CC BY-ND

Connecting The Data Dots

In some regions, such as the U.S. Midwest, roads are arranged on a grid that reflects land survey lines. Networks like these can be ideal for mapping species distributions. Delineating an area that’s occupied by a specific cicada brood may be as simple as connecting the dots that represent our positive sightings.

In other places, such as Appalachia, roads often follow ridges or valleys and miss many areas. Here, it’s harder to infer where cicadas are present between data points, especially when those data points are located on different roads.

Drawing a boundary that contains every data point in a survey area usually will end up overstating the area where periodical cicadas are emerging. We intentionally design our maps to be conservative, so we display our information as point data and do not attempt to draw brood boundaries or generalize our data to counties.

It’s equally important to record absence points – places where no cicadas are present. Otherwise, an area might be blank either because a species is absent or simply because no one looked for cicadas there.

A Cicada Nymph From Brood X Sheds Its Skin During an Emergence in Herndon, Va. Chris Simon, CC BY-ND

We have been verifying periodical cicada records and updating maps since the late 1980s. Our more recent maps include geographic information for data collection points.

Where our maps show the presence of cicadas, a senior member of our project has verified that cicadas were present at that place and date. The insects may have been just emerging, singing loudly, or on their way out.

Where our maps show the absence of cicadas, that means that one of us or a collaborator visited that location under appropriate conditions and verified that no cicadas were present. Where our maps show no records, we have no information on presence or absence.

Each Color on this Map Represents a Different Periodical Cicada Brood. Brood XIV is the Darker Green Extending From the Midwest to Eastern Massachusetts. University of Connecticut, Used with Permission., CC BY-ND

Crowdsourcing The Emergence

In recent years, citizen scientists – members of the public collecting data for scientific research – have revolutionized mapping efforts, using apps and the internet. Apps such as iNaturalist and Cicada Safari allow users to submit geolocated photos, sounds and videos with a few clicks.

When we receive these records, our colleague Gene Kritsky, an emeritus entomologist at Mount St. Joseph University, vets them with his team. Then they are uploaded to a map on Cicada Safari.

Citizen science maps have different biases from those that are created by our expert teams. Members of the public tend to collect their data in areas where residents are familiar with cicadas, there is good internet connectivity and media stories have piqued volunteer reporters’ interest. These maps don’t show absence records or all localities, especially in sparsely populated areas.

Even records supported by sounds or photographs may not be accurate. They may capture “stragglers” from broods that are not part of the current year’s cycle but are emerging one to four years early or late.

This phenomenon may become more commonplace in response to changing climates. Warming temperatures create longer growing seasons, which can enable at least some fraction of a periodical cicada population to develop faster and be ready to emerge earlier.

For this reason, maps based on citizen science reports are most valuable if the same observers report back from the same locations repeatedly over several weeks. The longer-term presence of periodical cicadas indicates that what’s being tallied is a non-straggler population, or a straggler population on its way to permanently shifting the timing of its emergence.

An Evolving Story

Maps are valuable tools for understanding how species fit into their environment, how they interact with other species and how they respond to change. However, it is important to be aware of any map’s biases and limitations when interpreting it. Research requires dedication and repetition over many years.

Our research suggests that climate warming has resulted in more four-year-early straggling events that are increasingly dense, widespread and likely to leave offspring. The result is a mosaic of broods that makes the jigsaw puzzle of periodical cicada distribution more complicated, but more interesting. Understanding how these four-year shifts are encoded in cicadas’ genes is a mystery that remains to be solved.

[beaver-moon]

theconversation.com

[welcometohell09]

The way that some of y'all are talking about the UK Supreme Court's ruling on trans people in gender segregated spaces is going to get trans men killed and I'm sick of being nice about it.

If your response to this clusterfuck is to talk about trans men using womens' bathrooms as a "gotcha" where the trans man "could be a cis man", you are going to get trans men beaten to death. Cis women are already being harassed on the basis of being too masculine in "female-only" spaces. What the fuck do you think is happening to trans men??? Trans men are already routinely denied access to things like womens' shelters both on the faux-progressive grounds of "respecting their gender identity" and the notion that trans men are threatening to women because we are men. Now, trans men can't use either bathroom safely and, what. It's a joke to you? Ha ha, look-who-the-scary-man-is-now?

If I see one more person trying to claim that the ruling "only target[s] trans women" and that "trans men are conveniently ignored" (as this reddit post so boldly proclaims) I am going to completely flip my shit. Transgender men are going to be crushed under this and that is completely by design. Transphobes know we're here, and they want us detransitioned and pregnant and tradwived-up every bit as much as they want trans women gone.

The way some of you bend over backwards to reinforce the erasure of transmasculine struggles is genuinely disturbing. Get a fucking grip.

(A link mentioning what the ruling means for trans men specifically, including how recent interpretations of the ruling may ban trans men from "female-only spaces": https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-uk-supreme-courts-gender-ruling-mean-for-trans-men-254868?utm_medium=article_clipboard_share&utm_source=theconversation.com)

(Another link about the harassment of cis women that I couldn't embed properly: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/18/11690234/women-bathrooms-harassment)

[synticity]

sign language & linguistics resource!

linguist Adam Schembri has been updating his amazing resource, What All Linguists Should Know (about sign languages). It's a really fantastic repository of info, including some really great basics that are great for students and non-linguists as well. Please share widely! I'll also copy a few links from his page, just as highlights:

What is sign language? (Schembri, 2013) https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-sign-language-21453 

How many sign languages are there? (Glottolog) https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/sign1238 (short answer: at least 220)

How are sign languages acquired? (Lillo-Martin & Henner, 2021) https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-043020-092357

I recommend that anyone interested in or studying linguistics at any level (from hobbyist to professional!) ask themselves (and colleagues, instructors, students, etc), frequently: wait - is that true about languages in general, or just spoken languages? Have we done any research about how this works in other modalities? Keep asking the question!

[chaotic-archaeologist]

I saw your post in the thread about the Budj Bim creation myth, and you mentioned that you teach Ancient Civilizations and have a week on Australia and the Torres Strait Islands. I was wondering if you have any recorded lectures on this topic that are available anywhere online?

Or do you have any recommendations for freely available resources to learn more?

Hi there,

I'm so glad you're interested in this (and also so sorry it took me this long to answer)! I'm also tagging @four-ravens-in-a-trenchcoat because you sent a very similar ask.

I'm far from the expert, so I'm going to tag @micewithknives and @acearchaeologist who are both Australian archaeologists with far more knowledge than I. The lessons I've developed have been with their expertise as guidance.

I'll start out by linking to a short piece about Budj Bim and its eel traps being designated as a world heritage site and why that's important:

This page talks a little bit more about the eel traps, the creation story, and the Gunditjmara people who live there:

Unfortunately, I don't record my lectures, and sharing them would probably violate some privacy laws. I can, however, share the readings I give my students.

The week is broken into two class periods, and for each session I ask students to read one scholarly piece and one more pop culture one. The readings for the first part are:

Nunn, Patrick. 2018. “Australian Aboriginal Memories of Coastal Drowning.” In The Edge of Memory: Ancient Stories, Oral Tradition and the Post-Glacial World, 63–107. Bloomsbury Sigma. Clarkson, Chris, Ben Marwick, Lynley Wallis, Richard Law Kelaham Fullagar, and Zenobia Jacobs. 2017. “Buried Tools and Pigments Tell a New History of Humans in Australia for 65,000 Years.” The Conversation, July 19, 2017. https://theconversation.com/buried-tools-and-pigments-tell-a-new-history-of-humans-in-australia-for-65-000-years-81021.

and then for the second class:

Taçon, Paul S. C., Rosalie S. Chapple, John Merson, Daniel Ramp, Wayne Brennan, Graham King, and Alandra Tasire. 2010. “Aboriginal Rock Art Depictions of Fauna: What Can They Tell Us about the Natural History of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area?" https://doi.org/10.7882/FS.2010.008. Smithsonian Magazine. 2019. “A 42,000-Year-Old Man Finally Goes Home,” September 2019. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/mungo-man-finally-goes-home-180972835/.

The important part of this unit is that it comes right after we learn about the four classic river valley civilizations (Mesopotamia, the Indus, China, and Egypt). These "Big 4" all fit the description of the article I have them read at the very beginning of the class about the Key Components of Civilizations.

Australia week is about challenging that definition of civilization by examining where it came from, how it was developed, and who it excludes. At the end of the week I have students come up with another definition of Civilization that does not exclude Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, Indigenous groups in North and South America, nomadic groups, etc.

The book (The Edge of Memory) by Patrick Nunn is a good one (for this class we only read the third chapter, but the entire book is worth a read.

Decolonizing Research Indigenous Storywork as Methodology is an edited volume that features perspectives on oral history from Indigenous people all over the world, including Australia.

Cheers, -Reid

[allthecanadianpolitics]

https://theconversation.com/updates-to-canadas-copyright-act-bring-consumers-closer-to-the-right-to-repair-your-devices-241535

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The Coprophagic AI crisis

I'm on tour with my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me in TORONTO on Mar 22, then with LAURA POITRAS in NYC on Mar 24, then Anaheim, and more!

A key requirement for being a science fiction writer without losing your mind is the ability to distinguish between science fiction (futuristic thought experiments) and predictions. SF writers who lack this trait come to fancy themselves fortune-tellers who SEE! THE! FUTURE!

The thing is, sf writers cheat. We palm cards in order to set up pulp adventure stories that let us indulge our thought experiments. These palmed cards – say, faster-than-light drives or time-machines – are narrative devices, not scientifically grounded proposals.

Historically, the fact that some people – both writers and readers – couldn't tell the difference wasn't all that important, because people who fell prey to the sf-as-prophecy delusion didn't have the power to re-orient our society around their mistaken beliefs. But with the rise and rise of sf-obsessed tech billionaires who keep trying to invent the torment nexus, sf writers are starting to be more vocal about distinguishing between our made-up funny stories and predictions (AKA "cyberpunk is a warning, not a suggestion"):

https://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2023/11/dont-create-the-torment-nexus.html

In that spirit, I'd like to point to how one of sf's most frequently palmed cards has become a commonplace of the AI crowd. That sleight of hand is: "add enough compute and the computer will wake up." This is a shopworn cliche of sf, the idea that once a computer matches the human brain for "complexity" or "power" (or some other simple-seeming but profoundly nebulous metric), the computer will become conscious. Think of "Mike" in Heinlein's *The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress#Plot

For people inflating the current AI hype bubble, this idea that making the AI "more powerful" will correct its defects is key. Whenever an AI "hallucinates" in a way that seems to disqualify it from the high-value applications that justify the torrent of investment in the field, boosters say, "Sure, the AI isn't good enough…yet. But once we shovel an order of magnitude more training data into the hopper, we'll solve that, because (as everyone knows) making the computer 'more powerful' solves the AI problem":

https://locusmag.com/2023/12/commentary-cory-doctorow-what-kind-of-bubble-is-ai/

As the lawyers say, this "cites facts not in evidence." But let's stipulate that it's true for a moment. If all we need to make the AI better is more training data, is that something we can count on? Consider the problem of "botshit," Andre Spicer and co's very useful coinage describing "inaccurate or fabricated content" shat out at scale by AIs:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4678265

"Botshit" was coined last December, but the internet is already drowning in it. Desperate people, confronted with an economy modeled on a high-speed game of musical chairs in which the opportunities for a decent livelihood grow ever scarcer, are being scammed into generating mountains of botshit in the hopes of securing the elusive "passive income":

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/15/passive-income-brainworms/#four-hour-work-week

Botshit can be produced at a scale and velocity that beggars the imagination. Consider that Amazon has had to cap the number of self-published "books" an author can submit to a mere three books per day:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/20/amazon-restricts-authors-from-self-publishing-more-than-three-books-a-day-after-ai-concerns

As the web becomes an anaerobic lagoon for botshit, the quantum of human-generated "content" in any internet core sample is dwindling to homeopathic levels. Even sources considered to be nominally high-quality, from Cnet articles to legal briefs, are contaminated with botshit:

https://theconversation.com/ai-is-creating-fake-legal-cases-and-making-its-way-into-real-courtrooms-with-disastrous-results-225080

Ironically, AI companies are setting themselves up for this problem. Google and Microsoft's full-court press for "AI powered search" imagines a future for the web in which search-engines stop returning links to web-pages, and instead summarize their content. The question is, why the fuck would anyone write the web if the only "person" who can find what they write is an AI's crawler, which ingests the writing for its own training, but has no interest in steering readers to see what you've written? If AI search ever becomes a thing, the open web will become an AI CAFO and search crawlers will increasingly end up imbibing the contents of its manure lagoon.

This problem has been a long time coming. Just over a year ago, Jathan Sadowski coined the term "Habsburg AI" to describe a model trained on the output of another model:

https://twitter.com/jathansadowski/status/1625245803211272194

There's a certain intuitive case for this being a bad idea, akin to feeding cows a slurry made of the diseased brains of other cows:

https://www.cdc.gov/prions/bse/index.html

But "The Curse of Recursion: Training on Generated Data Makes Models Forget," a recent paper, goes beyond the ick factor of AI that is fed on botshit and delves into the mathematical consequences of AI coprophagia:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493

Co-author Ross Anderson summarizes the finding neatly: "using model-generated content in training causes irreversible defects":

https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2023/06/06/will-gpt-models-choke-on-their-own-exhaust/

Which is all to say: even if you accept the mystical proposition that more training data "solves" the AI problems that constitute total unsuitability for high-value applications that justify the trillions in valuation analysts are touting, that training data is going to be ever-more elusive.

What's more, while the proposition that "more training data will linearly improve the quality of AI predictions" is a mere article of faith, "training an AI on the output of another AI makes it exponentially worse" is a matter of fact.

Name your price for 18 of my DRM-free ebooks and support the Electronic Frontier Foundation with the Humble Cory Doctorow Bundle.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/14/14/inhuman-centipede#enshittibottification

Image: Plamenart (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Double_Mobius_Strip.JPG

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

[tinkerbitch69]

I’m sorry…

McFuckingWhat???!!!

Article: https://theconversation.com/why-taylor-swifts-gothic-work-is-as-important-as-the-novels-of-mary-shelley-or-bram-stoker-233518

[xtruss]

From Peasant Fodder To Posh Fare: How Snails And Oysters Became Luxury Foods

— Beth Daley | The Conversation | May 22, 2025

An Oyster cellar in Leith. John Burnet, 1819; National Galleries of Scotland, Photo: Antonia Reeve

Oysters and escargot are recognised as luxury foods around the world – but they were once valued by the lower classes as cheap sources of protein. Less adventurous eaters today see snails as a garden pest, and are quick to point out that freshly shucked oysters are not only raw but also alive when they are eaten. How did these unusual ingredients become items of conspicuous consumption?

From Garden Snail To Gastronomy

Eating what many consider to be a slimy nuisance seems almost counter-intuitive, but consuming land snails has an ancient history, dating to the Palaeolithic period, some 30,000 years ago in eastern Spain. Ancient Romans also dined on snails, and spread their eating habits across their empire into Europe. Lower and middle class Romans ate snails from their gardens, while elite consumers ate specially farmed snails, fed spices, honey and milk.

An Ancient Roman mosaic dating to the 4th century AD depicting a basket of snails, Basilica di Santa Maria Assunta, Aquileia, Italy. Carole Raddato/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Pliny the Elder (AD 24–79) described how snails were raised in ponds and given wine to fatten them up. The first French recipe for snails appears in 1390, in Le Ménagier de Paris (The Good Wife’s Guide), but not in other cookbooks from the period.

In 1530, a French treatise on frogs, snails, turtles and artichokes considered all these foods bizarre, but surprisingly popular. Some of the appeal had to do with avoiding meat on “lean” days. Snails were classified as fish by the Catholic Church, and could even be eaten during Lent.

For the next 200 years, snails only appeared in Parisian cookbooks with an apology for including such a disgusting ingredient. This reflected the taste of upper-class urbanites, but snails were still eaten in the eastern provinces.

Schneckenweib, or Snail Seller, illustrated by Johann Christian Brand in Vienna, after 1798. Wien Museum

An 1811 cookbook from Metz, in the Alsace region in northeastern France, describes raising snails like the Romans, and a special platter, l'escargotière, for serving them. The trend did not travel to Paris until after 1814.

French diplomat Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord (1754–1838) hosted a dinner for Russian Tsar Alexander I, after he marched into Paris following the allied forces’ defeat of Napoleon in 1814. The chef catering the meal was the father of French cuisine Marie-Antoine Carême, a native of Burgundy, spiritual home of the now famous escargots de Bourgogne.

Carême served the Tsar what would become a classic recipe, prepared with garlic, parsley and butter. Allegedly, the Tsar raved about the “new” dish, and snails became wildly popular. A recipe for Burgundy snails first appeared in a French culinary dictionary published in 1825.

It is ironic that it took the approval of a foreign emperor, who had just conquered Napoleon, to restore luxury status to escargot, a food that became a symbol of French cuisine. Snails remain popular today in France, with consumption peaking during the Christmas holidays, but May 24 is National Escargot Day in France.

Oysters: The Original Fast Food

Oysters are another ancient food, as seen in fossils dating to the Triassic Era, 200 million years ago. Evidence of fossilised oysters are found on every major land mass, and there is evidence of Indigenous oyster fisheries in North America and Australia that dates to the Holocene period, about 12,000 years ago.

There are references in classical Greek texts to what are probably oysters, by authors like Aristotle and Homer. Oyster shells found at Troy confirm they were a favoured food. Traditionally served as a first course at banquets in Ancient Greece, they were often cooked, sometimes with exotic spices.

Music-cover sheet for ‘Bonne-Bouche’ by Emile Waldteufel, 1847-1897. © The Trustees of the British Museum, CC BY-NC-SA

Pliny the Elder refers to oysters as a Roman delicacy. He recorded methods of the pioneer of Roman oyster farming, Sergius Orata, who brought the best specimens from across the Empire to sell to elite customers.

Medieval coastal dwellers gathered oysters at low tide, while wealthy inland consumers would have paid a premium for shellfish, a perishable luxury, transported to their castles.

French nobles in 1390 preferred cooked oysters, roasted over coals or poached in broths, perhaps as a measure to prevent food poisoning. As late as the 17th century, authors cautioned:

But if they be eaten raw, they require good wine […] to aid digestion.

Oyster Seller, Jacob Gole, 1688–1724. Rijksmuseum

By the 18th century, small oysters were a popular pub snack, and larger ones were added as meat to the stew pot. That century, it is believed as many as 100,000 oysters were eaten each day in Edinburgh and the shells from the tavern in the basement filled in gaps in the brickwork at Gladstone’s Land in Edinburgh’s Royal Mile.

Scottish oyster farms in the Firth of Forth, an inlet of the North Sea, produced 30 million oysters in 1790, but continual over-harvesting took its toll. By 1883 only 6,000 oysters were landed, and the population was declared extinct in 1957.

As wild oyster stocks dwindled, large oyster farms developed in cities like New York in the 19th century. Initially successful, they were polluted, and infected by typhoid from sewage. An outbreak in 1924 killed 150 people, the deadliest food poisoning in United States history.

Costumes of Naples: Oyster Sellers, c. 1906–10. Rijksmuseum

Far from the overabundance of oysters we once had, over-fishing, pollution, and invasive species all threaten oyster populations worldwide today. Due to this scarcity of wild oysters and the resources required to safely farm environmentally sustainable oysters, they are now a premium product.

Next On The Menu

Scarcity made oysters a luxury, and a Tsar’s approval elevated snails to gourmet status. Could insects become the next status food? Ancient Romans ate beetles and grasshoppers, and cultures around the world consume insects, but not (yet) as luxury products. Maybe the right influencer can make honey-roasted locust the next species to jump from paddock to plate.

[olderthannetfic]

https://theconversation.com/a-sydney-dark-romance-author-is-charged-with-producing-child-sex-abuse-material-how-do-we-police-books-in-australia-253234

somehow i feel like legally conflating csam involving real children with fictional material dilutes the real harm done towards the former and its lifelong impact on csa survivors.

--

[ricisidro]

The World Health Organization (WHO) designated LP.8.1 as a variant under monitoring in January 2025.

LP.8.1, was first detected in July 2024. It’s a descendant of Omicron KP.1.1.3, which is descended from JN.1, a subvariant that caused large waves of Covid infections around the world in late 2023 & early 2024.

#SARSCoV2 #covid #COVID19 #WHO

-https://theconversation.com/a-new-covid-variant-is-on-the-rise-heres-what-to-know-about-lp-8-1-253237?utm_medium=article_native_share&utm_source=theconversation.com

-https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/risk-evaluation-for-sars-cov-2-variant-under-monitoring-lp81

[folklorespring]

Here's an article on why Georgia is protesting against foreign agents bill and why it is called russian law:

https://theconversation.com/georgia-is-sliding-towards-autocracy-after-government-moves-to-force-through-bill-on-foreign-agents-228219

[theabigailthorn]

Heya Abby,

(just want to start this of by saying i m a massive fan and absolutely adore your content as it s definitely been one of my autistic hyper fixations)

I just noticed that you used person-first terminology ( people with disabilities) in your latest video (great video btw). I just wanted to let you know that it can be inadvertently stigmatising (think person with same gender attraction vs queer person). It’s quite a strong conversation within the disabled community rn and generally there s a preference for disabled people vs people disability. Note a lot of autistic people and blind/deaf people use identity first language because we see our disability as a part of us worthy of being celebrated, not separated.

Anyway sorry if this is something you already know it just ran a little wrong with me when i heard it. (https://theconversation.com/should-i-say-disabled-person-or-person-with-a-disability-113618)

Huh, okay thank you for letting me know! I genuinely thought it was the other way around, I must have gotten mixed up - thank you for correcting me!

[qqueenofhades]

I just read an article on The Conversation that states: "Today, most data has Trump narrowly beating Biden in the national popular vote, albeit within the statistical margin of error." (Source for that data: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/)

In your opinion, is that true? How can that be possible after everything Trump has done? After the Insurrection? I'm terrified 😕

(For reference, the original article can be found at https://theconversation.com/five-reasons-why-trumps-republican-opponents-were-never-going-to-beat-him-223288?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325&utm_content=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325+CID_fceedfd21410eb8a7b6fd6e1124d9d54&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=five%20reasons)

Short answer: no, I don't think it's true.

Long answer: no, I really don't think it's true. Here's why.

Broader context. A Republican has won the popular presidential vote only twice in the 21st century, and in the first of those occasions -- 2000 -- I use "won" very advisedly. We all know, or at least we should, about all the fuckery that went down in Florida with Bush vs. Gore and SCOTUS stepping in to stop the recount (which almost surely would have gone to Gore) and handing Florida, and thus the presidency, to George Dubya Bush by a mere 537 votes. Dubya then did win re-election and the popular vote/EC in 2004, in the throes of patriotic war fervor and the GOP's Swiftboating of John Kerry (who was a pretty terrible candidate to start with). Other than that? None. Zip. Nada. None. Even in 2016 when Trump squeaked out a win (and thus the presidency) in the Electoral College, he lost nationwide to HRC by over 3 million votes. He lost to Biden by 7 million votes nationwide last time. Also, the reason the GOP loves the antidemocratic Electoral College is that it always works in their favor, and because red states with relatively scant population are given the same power in the Senate. That's why California, with 40+ million people, gets two (Democratic) senators, and Wyoming, with 400,000 people, gets two (Republican) senators. There is just no way that red states can get the actual raw numbers to win the popular vote against heavily blue urban population centers. The only one that comes close is Texas, and while it's something of a white whale for Democrats who think fondly that it'll surely turn blue this election cycle (and then it doesn't), it's not giving all its votes popular-vote-wise to Republicans. So yeah. The numbers aren't there. Biden is about 99% certain to win the popular vote, but because this is America, the question is whether the EC will follow.

(Although, I gotta say. In the deeply unlikely event that Biden loses the popular vote but wins the Electoral College -- i.e. the exact same thing Trump did in 2016 -- the right wing would lose their fucking minds and it would be incredibly hilarious. Also, we might finally get some red states willing to sign up to the National Popular Vote Compact, which is just a few ratifications away from going into effect. As noted, the Republicans will cling onto the Electoral College with their last dying breath because it's the only thing that makes them competitive in nationwide elections. If it fucked Trump, they might finally listen to ideas about changing it.)

The media are incredibly biased, and so is Nate Silver. Silver first rose to prominence as an independent geeky Data Guy elections whiz-kid, and was relatively good at being unbiased. That is not the case anymore. He's now affiliated with the New York Times and has started echoing the smugly anti-Biden framework of both that paper and the mainstream media in general. I'm not necessarily saying his data is total bunk, but he's extremely eager to frame, narrate, and explain it in ways that artificially disadvantage Biden (in the same way the NYT itself is all in on "BUT HIS AGEEEEE," just as they were with "BUT HER EEEEEEMAILS" in 2016) And that's a problem, because:

The polls are shit. Like, really, really shit. Didn't we just go through this in 2022, where everyone howled about how All The Data pointed to a Red Wave and then were /shocked pikachu face when this was nothing more than a Red Dribble of Piss (and frankly, the best midterm election result for the ruling party since like, the 1930s?) We've also had major, real-time proof that the polls are showing a consistent pro-Trump bias of 10 or more points, which is a huge error and keeps getting corrected whenever people actually vote, but the media will never admit that, because TRUMP IS WINNING WE ARE ALL DOOMZED!! We heard about how Biden might lose New Hampshire because he wasn't even on the ballot and that would be a critical embarrassment for him. He cruised easily with 68% (all write-in votes and FAR more than any other Democratic "candidate.") Meanwhile, Trump won New Hampshire by about 15% under what the polls had predicted for him (after doing the same and barely squeaking over 50% in Iowa, one of the whitest, most rural, most Trump-loving states in the nation). The number ballparked for Biden in the NV Democratic primary was something like 75%; he got over 90% (and twice as many votes as any candidate in the Republican Primary/Caucus/Whatever That Mess Was). The number for what he was supposed to get in the SC primary was in the high 60% (driven by the media's other favorite "Black voters are abandoning Biden" canard); he absolutely crushed it at 97% statewide. When Biden is winning by whopping margins and Trump is underperforming badly, in both cases by gaps of ten percent or more, it means the polls are simply not showing us an accurate state of the race. This could be because of media bias, bad data, selective polling, inability to actually connect with voters (especially young voters, who are about as likely to eat a live scorpion as to pick up an unsolicited phone call from an unknown number). This also shows up in:

Special elections. We've heard tons of Very Smart Punditry (derogatory) about how Democrats kicking ass in pretty much every competitive election since Roe was overturned in 2022 totally means nothing for the general election. (Of course, if the situation was reversed and Republicans were cleaning up at the same rate, we would be hearing nothing except how we're all destined for Eternal Trumpocracy... wait. no... we're still only hearing this. Weird.) In the last special election in early February, Democrat Tom Suozzi won back his old U.S House seat (NY-03) by over eight points, after polls had given him at most a two- or three-point edge. (Funnily, once again a Democrat did far better than the media is determined to insist, so Politico hilariously called a thumping eight-point win "edging it out.") This represents almost a 16-point blue swing from even just 2022, when The Congressman Possibly Known as George Santos won it by 7 points. On that same night, a Democratic candidate in a Trump +26 district in deep, deep red Oklahoma only lost by 5 points, marking another massive pro-blue swing. This has been the case in every special election since Roe went down. Apparently blah blah This Won't Translate to the General Election, because the media is very smart. Even when Democrats (historically hard to motivate and muster in off-year election cycles, or you know in general) are turning up in elections that don't involve Trump to punish terrible Trumpist policies, we're supposed to think they won't be motivated to actually vote against the guy himself? And not just them, because:

Trump is a terrible candidate. Which we know, and have always known, but now it's really true. We've had up to half of Haley voters stating they will vote for Biden over Trump if that is the November matchup (which it will be). Haley, amusingly, actually outraised Trump in January, because it turns out that the Trump Crime Family's open promise to send every single donor or RNC dollar to pay El Trumpo's legal fees hasn't been a terribly effective message. We had Republicans in NY-03 telling CNN that they voted for the Democrat Suozzi because they're so fed up with the GOP clown show in the House and don't think Republicans can govern (which uh. Yeah. Welcome to reality, we all knew that ages ago too). We have had up to a third of Republican voters saying they won't vote for Trump if he's convicted of a felony before the election (and technically he already has been, but we're still hoping for the January 6 trial to go ahead). Now, yes, Republicans are a notoriously cliquey bunch and might change their minds, but for all the endless bullshit BIDEN SHOULD STEP DOWN BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ARE DISUNITED narrative the media has been pushing like their kidnapped grandmothers' lives depend on it, Democrats aren't actually disunited at all. Instead, Trump is in chaos, the GOP is in chaos, sizeable chunks of Republican voters are ready to vote for someone else and in some cases have already done so, and yet, do we hear a peep about how Trump should step down? Nah. In related news, did you hear that Biden is old?!?! Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?!

Now, I want to make it clear: Trump's chances of winning are not zero, and they are not inconsiderable. We need to face that fact and deal with it accordingly. Large chunks of the country are still willing to vote for white Christian nationalist fascism. Trump still has plenty of diehard cultists and the entire establishment Republican party in his pocket, and it's been made very clear that Putin is bringing the full force of his malevolent Russian fascist machine to bear on this election as well. Case in point: we spent four years hearing about HUNTER BIDEN HUNTER BIDEN SECRET CORRUPTION GIANT SECRET BUSINESS SCANDAL, and it turns out that the GOP's "star informant" has been actively working with Russian spies the whole time and fed them complete bullshit disinformation, which they were eager to repeat so long as it might hurt Joe Biden. (And it would hurt Ukraine, so, twofer! I cannot emphasize enough how much it was all a deliberate collaboration by some of the worst people on earth.)

In 2016, people naively assumed that Trump could never win, and so they were especially willing to throw away, spoil, or otherwise not exercise their vote, or throw purity hissy fits over HRC (likewise fed at the toxic teat of Russian disinformation). That was exactly what allowed Trump to squeak out a win in the EC and put us in the mess we are currently in. If people act in the same way in 2024 that they did in 2016, Trump's chances of winning are drastically increased. So once again, as I keep saying, it's up to us. If we all vote blue, and we get our networks to vote blue, Biden is very likely to win. If we don't, he won't, and Trump will win. It's that simple. We had better decide what we're doing. The end.

[aropride]

covid vaccines work in that, for about 3 to 6 months[1], you're less likely to get the variants of covid that the vaccine protects against, and if you do catch it, you're less likely to develop long covid[2]. it is not full protection, especially with the amount of strains going around "post-covid." the vaccine is not dangerous, but it is dangerous to use the vaccine as your only defense against covid. (and if your last covid vaccine/booster was in 2021/2022 when they first came out, you're effectively not vaccinated against it anymore)

the most effective way of preventing covid is wearing a mask [3], specifically a kn95, kf95, n95, or p100 respirator [4]. preventing the virus from getting in your body in the first place is what will prevent you from getting the virus or from developing long term effects. vaccines are good but that should be in combination with masking, not instead of it. and masking needs to be consistent even if you're not sick or if you don't think anyone in your vicinity is sick (considering asymptomatic/presymptomatic infection + covid lingering in the air).

[1] https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/what-to-know-about-updated-covid-vaccines-for-2024-25 "the COVID vaccine provides strong protection against infection for up to three months and protection against severe disease out to six months. That said, there are a lot of variables that can affect duration and strength of protection, including any new variants that may emerge and how different they are from the vaccine formulation."

[2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(24)00082-1/fulltext

[3] https://theconversation.com/yes-masks-reduce-the-risk-of-spreading-covid-despite-a-review-saying-they-dont-198992 "There is strong and consistent evidence for the effectiveness of masks and (even more so) respirators in protecting against respiratory infections. Masks are an important protection against serious infections. Current COVID vaccines protect against death and hospitalisation, but do not prevent infection well due to waning vaccine immunity and substantial immune escape from new variants."

[4] https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/what-doctors-wish-patients-knew-about-wearing-n95-masks "In fact, N95 and KN95 masks were found to be 48% more effective than surgical or cloth masks, according to a CDC study. Wearing an N95 or KN95 mask reduces the odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 by 83%. This is compared with 66% for surgical masks and 56% for cloth masks, further pushing the need to swap out such face coverings for an N95 or KN95 mask for protection from SARS-CoV-2."

[allthecanadianpolitics]

https://theconversation.com/why-tax-literacy-should-be-a-national-priority-in-canada-252722