#so pls dont see this as me having personal issues with any specific user

[lgbtlunaverse]

I think the guidao vs modao distinction is incredibly fascinating and really illustrates the novel's point about rumours and reputation being unreliable by having wei wuxian's cultivation technique be named after something he personally never used it for. But I did just see someone describe guidao as wwx "respectfully asking ghosts to do his bidding" and guys I cannot stress this enough wei wuxian did very much force wen he killed to slaughter their own families. That was a pretty significant thing that happened. I get the point you're trying to make about ghosts vs demons but he did literally kill people and then puppeteered their corpses around to make them murder their own families.

[angeloncewas]

i really hate that people (a lot of my mutuals specifically) are saying stuff like "jawsh and noah were right!!" bc like. imo no they werent. you can admit that they had a good point on a different situation or even think like "oh i get where they were coming from now" but that doesnt change the fact that both of their statements came across as ableist then and they still do now, especially bc of their actual actions both before and after that whole situation. stanning someone does not automatically mean being a terrible fucking person and the fact that people who left mcyttwt/switched to subtwts like technotwt for safety think that now somehow blows my fucking mind bc they of all people should understand that you can criticize someone or something without generalizing it or condemning it entirely. also like. it doesnt really matter what terminology you wanna use, calling urself a fan doesnt make you any less of a stan nowadays when the word stan is now used the exact same way as fan so people trying so hard to seperate them bc other stans have given them a bad rep is just weird like why dont you just try and make stans look better instead of shitting on them as if you dont also have a layout for a fucking different minecraft white boy?? the problem isnt even really stans, it's that a lot of mcyttwt is getting shit easy bc their ccs dont call them out when they cross boundaries and when they are called out by other people they automatically get defensive bc people actually being shitty in the past made them think all criticism is hate. idk if this really makes sense im just super annoyed by everyone saying this shit rn like pls how have we done a complete 180 to thinking these two are somehow good just bc theyve made a few okay criticisms?

Exactly ! I understand the want to distance yourself from a community with a bad rep - to be honest, you won't catch me calling myself a "stan" except for as a joke - but that doesn't change the base-level qualifications and the perspective from which Jawsh and Noah are making these statements. Their careers are built on "stans" whether they like it or not - just because theirs aren't cancelling people on twt don't make them any less slash parasocial or hivemind-like - and they'd rather bitch and moan about the current social climate than actually take the time to dissect its flaws, understand the individuals within it, and attempt to foster a better community. No, they throw their hands up and claim that it's "inherently toxic" while the cash filters into their pockets, telling Minecrafters to bend over so that they can fuck them in the ass every time their impressions are low. These aren't empathetic people pointing out serious issues, they've got basic observational skills and a holier-than-thou attitude. I know that what they're saying rings true and it's because twitter users are surrounded by people caught in the thick of it, but that doesn't at all mean that they're on your side.

I'm worried about where this will lead, because mcyttwt tends to have a very black-and-white attitude (as do most people, but they're the focus here) and falling deeply into that kind of mindset - as I said before - is just as unhealthy, if not more so. Hyper-criticism and invasive attitudes toward streamers are a very prevalent problem in the Twitch community (and outside of it) atm, but those issues are so often being pointed out by people who are only angry because they can no longer get away with being racist/sexist/ableist/etc for views.

It's just not an either-or and I really hope that people breaking out of the "stantwt" community don't throw themselves into that side of things just because they see it as the only other option.

[livisart]

oh my god you guys, the new COPPA thing will NOT help children ffs

listen i care a lot about kids safety online, as someone who’s had. very bad experiences on the internet when i was younger, i get it ok. i get it.

but the whole new COPPA thing will not only hurt creators, but will also do more harm than good in helping to keep kids safe.

i see a lot of people painting the FTC as 100% reasonable and youtube as 100% at fault (or conversely, youtube as innocent martyrs and the FTC as evil), personally, i think both the FTC and youtube are at fault here. its reasonable for the FTC to be concerned, but theyre trying to implement laws abt things they dont know anything about, and meanwhile youtube is trying to “solve” this in the worst possible way.

yall are gonna be big mad at me for saying this but. children seeing personalized ads do not hurt them any more than they do adults. let me explain.

(note: before i say anything more i wanna get this out of the way: whether youtube collecting data for ads AT ALL, is bad is a discussion for another day, it’s NOT what we should be focusing on right now, so i will not bring it up in this post)

youtube obviously does not collect this data in the youtube kids app, cuz it’s explicitly made for kids. this is an issue regarding youtube main, specifically, kids under 13 using their parents accounts to watch videos (as a sidenote, the whole thing the FTC were concerned about seems to be youtube collecting data WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT, but parents allowing their kids to use youtube main sounds a lot like consent to me. honestly i might b wrong abt this but to me it seems like the easiest way for youtube to solve this problem would be to add smth in their tos abt the data collected and how letting any1 under 13 use the main site = consent to collecting their data, but i digress.)

this means that any information collected is NOT the kids information, but the parents, since the child is using their account. there is absolutely no way to tell if a child or an adult is using the account, hence why youtube is going after “”kids content”” and assuming EVERYONE who watches “”kids content”” is a child (remember that this doesnt only affect like peppa pig episodes and kids nursery rhymes and stuff, but ANY content that youtube n the FTCs vague rules consider ‘for kids’. with that in mind, hopefully i dont have to explain how stupid that is)

lemme repeat there is functionally ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to tell that a child is watching rather than an adult.

there’s also the fact that creators/users on youtube have absolutely no way of accessing the information collected, all we get is vague things like age range, gender, country. we do not get ANY information that’d let us see individual users data, let alone use it to contact them.

but basically, kids information is NOT being gathered, youtube kids does not gather this information, and youtube main gathers the information of the PARENTS, not the kids. so basically, this is a non-issue, and going through with these new regulations to “solve” this non-issue is dumb and jsut hurts EVERYONE.

now, here’s why i believe this will actually do more harm than good:

videos marked as “kids content” will not have personalized ads, meaning their ad revenue will drop with anything from 60-90%

also videos with this marking will not have comments, not be added to any playlists, etc. basically they’ll have less visibility and have a harder time being discovered.

big corporations will find a way to deal with this but smaller kids content creators won’t. many ppl who made content for kids will be forced to quit, since it’s just not sustainable anymore, meaning there’ll be a decrease in quality content for kids to watch.

but it gets worse. since these new rules will also affect “child attractive content”, this will actually give creators incentive to create more mature content to avoid the dreaded “made for kids” checkbox. especially considering any violations of this extremely vague rule can result in a 42k fine PER VIDEO. no one wants that.

so to make sure youtube and the FTC will not consider their content “for kids”, many channels that were previously child friendly (though not directly aimed at children) will start deliberately making their content more mature to alienate kids.

so with actual kids content decreasing, and child friendly content being replaced by more mature content, there’ll be MUCH LESS quality stuff for kids to watch, possibly leading them to watch the new mature content instead, so kids are just gonna risk seeing more stuff that’s harmful to them (with the same personalized ads that were the god damn problem to begin with so like good job on not solving anything)

basically this change will harm creators AND kids and not really help anyone in the long run

now, again i think the FTC and youtube are both at fault here.

youtube because they suck and can’t come up with any better solution.

the FTC because they’re trying to pass laws they know zero about. (seriously. a youtuber n former lawyer went to DC to talk to them abt the new rules and it turns out the FTC are soooo misinformed abt this it aint even funny)

and i’m very tired of people with negative braincells acting like this change is going to help kids at all.

it’s also actually kind of dangerous that ppl are saying “go tell youtube to change things, not the FTC”, because youtube doesn’t listen to ppl.  i thought that much would be apparent by now. youtube does not care abt its userbase.

the FTC, however, does and is willing to take ppls comments til like december 9th so pls go send them a comment.

im not saying you shouldnt blame youtube at all, or ask them to change, but dont just ignore the FTC’s role in this pls.

[dbrodosi]

David Brodosi Reviews Sony PXW-FS7M2 XDCAM Super 35 Camera System

First off, a little background. David Brodosi has never used the original Fs7, and before using the Fs7 ii he was using Canon systems primarily. Like a lot of people turned off by Sony, David Brodosi had internalized the usual myths: poor ergonomics, poor menu design, poor autofocus, bad button layout, lens mount system with poor lenses to match… David Brodosi was a Canon user, through and through, and used the C300 and C100 mark ii on hundreds of shoots over a three year period. To get the vague part out of the way: at the end of the day, these cameras are just tools. They can all get the job done, whether its Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Arri, or what-have-you. So my immensely positive review of this camera that is forthcoming isnt meant to diminish other cameras, which have been great tools for me in the past. Ive now been using the Fs7 ii for the past 6 months, and have had a great experience with this camera.

To start out by addressing some of the common complaints/myths about Sony cameras from non-users: 1. David Brodosi find the menu extremely well designed and easy to navigate. The words for certain operations are slightly different than that of a Canon camera, but at the end of the day, it has all the same functions. Its easy to change codec, resolution, different color profiles, timelines, slomo, ect. That has been a non-issue for me, to my surprise. Read the manual, thats usually a good start on any camera if you ask me. 2. David Brodosi find the button layout also to be great. There are programmable buttons, easy access to audio controls. David Brodosi kind of wish the two XLR inputs were together instead of separate on the body, but its not a huge deal. I love the shoulder mount. It allows me to get very smooth handheld shots without using IS lenses. A look I really like. The retractable arm is also amazing. David Brodosi use it on every handheld doc shoot I have, and the footage is much more usable/smooth than what I was getting by holding the C100 mark ii from the top handle. 3. Yeah, so about the autofocus. If thats a dealbreaker for you, then this is definitely not the camera for you. Not great autofocus. But heres the thing, David Brodosi barely use autofocus anyways.

I have a hand on the follow-focus or focus ring constantly to fine tune things anyway, so it was never a big deal for me. The viewer is perfectly fine, nothing special, but very functional and well built. 4. David Brodosi have no idea why people are complaining about the lens mount on this camera. Having a PL style locking e-mount keeps the lens SO much steadier while filming. Yeah, it takes an extra ten seconds to change the lens. If thats a big issue, you can get an EF adapter like I did and strap that to the front and then boom, you have your standard lens mount system. But for cinematic work, David Brodosi far prefer the locking e-mount, which offers a lot of advantages in terms of image stability and quality. Now to get to the most important aspect of the camera: the image quality. Its amazing. Ive shot both in their cine modes as well as the standard color profiles (custom non-LOG). My experiences with both has been incredible. If you shoot at higher frame rates, there is bound to be more noise in the image. David Brodosi have noticed especially at night, the noise is much more noticeable than it was with my C100 mark ii, but its easily timed out later in Resolve/Neat Video ect, and gives you the fidelity you need to get the most out of your image.

The noise has not been a huge issue. Its just made me a little more careful in low light conditions while shooting slo-mo. The shooting modes are easy to access and awesome: time lapse, slo-mo (you push a button on the side of the camera and voila). The 4k is beautiful 4:2:2 10 bit depth. The HD will save your batteries and media and allow you to shoot forever, while still looking amazing. Size wise, its not quite as incognito as the C100, obviously… Its the price you pay for getting the best possible image at this price point. For documentary work, this camera is unmatched. You see, even without the autofocus, the design of the camera and focus-assist controls making clean focusing a breeze.

The audio controls are extensive, and impressive. This is important to me, as David Brodosi often shoot alone in dangerous places around the world. Its important for me to be able to work effectively as a one-person crew when needed. One of the crown jewels of design of this camera is the infinitely adaptable ND filter. Unlike Canons ND design, which works in broad steps, the ND filter on this camera can be rotated freely, giving you the flexibility to set your iris to maintain a constant look for a scene, and simple adjust the ND wheel without steps to get the right exposure. Its absolute genius, and will change the way you film forever. If you need RAW (which I dont for documentary work), theres an ad-on you can get that makes that possible. My biggest complaints: -Size -Noise in slo-mo and very low light situations are pretty minimal. There are no perfect cameras out there. They all have their pluses and minuses. For my purposes shooting documentaries around the world, I really cant imagine a better camera. David Brodosi highly recommends.

Photo of David Brodosi a quality-driven and award-winning Videographer with 15+ years’ progressively responsible experience. Adept at filming, shooting and producing video content to meet different clients’ specific requirements. Ability to strategize brand teams to identify content needed to meet company goals. Artfully edits raw footages to create powerful videos using a variety of software products.