Skip to content

Fatphobia Is Fueled by AI-Created Images, Study Finds

Technology
14 12 0
  • The headline is not only bait but also wrong

    At best, they could claim that AI-generated images are fueled by societal associations of negative attributes with obesity

    And surely the use of the word phobia in an academic context should be more rigorous

    Agreed, AI just like all media, has the biggest question of "is it fueling bias's, or just reflecting them". It's drawing what people think of when they see something.

    It isn't racist for me to say, getting pulled over for no reason is far more likely if your skin is darker, it's just what society is.

    and that's of course before we talk about the general discussion of actually effective ways to deal with obesity in society... which is more complicated. Obviously directly shaming, has a negative impact. Making someone with an eating disorder feel shitty about themselves, makes it harder to overcome the disorder. At the same time saying it's not a problem for them to face at all is also not going to help them want to change.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    It wouldn't surprise me if 'fatphobia' turned out to be a psyop, like the corporate-funded research into nutrition whose aim is to plant a particular meme in the public conscience ('don't give up soda kids, just exercise to lose all that weight!')

    50 years of high-fructose food ubiquity doesn't negate millennia of evolutionary conditioning that expects us to be on foot most of the day, consuming high protein diets and covering 10+km distances

    The notion that we can out-social engineer physical reality is a doggedly persistent one

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Fatphobia energy should be redirected into carbohydrate education. We ban cigarettes not smokers. Teach overweight people their problem is all the carbs in their diet (sugar, soda, pizza, candy, etc).

  • The term fatphobia in general always irked me, it’s a co-opting of phobias usage with homophobia and feels like it’s trying to elevate itself to that level.

    There are definitely folk who see obese people as an acceptable target because they can hide behind (valid) health claims, and then justify their moral superiority because they don't have those "personal failures".

    The litmus test is if they think Semaglutide/GLP-1 is "legitimate" or obese people using it are "cheating".

  • Fatphobia energy should be redirected into carbohydrate education. We ban cigarettes not smokers. Teach overweight people their problem is all the carbs in their diet (sugar, soda, pizza, candy, etc).

    Just yesterday I was discussing this issue with my wife. Here we have "Physical Education" in schools, which is mostly kids doing exercises or some kind of sport activity in school, a couple of hours per week. This is surely fine, but I'd also like kids being taught the right way to eat, things to avoid, things to limit... I think it would be an investment for the future, which could avoid a lot of problems related to bad eating habits.

  • Just yesterday I was discussing this issue with my wife. Here we have "Physical Education" in schools, which is mostly kids doing exercises or some kind of sport activity in school, a couple of hours per week. This is surely fine, but I'd also like kids being taught the right way to eat, things to avoid, things to limit... I think it would be an investment for the future, which could avoid a lot of problems related to bad eating habits.

    I strongly agree! The current food pyramid experiment isn't working.

  • I’m a little done holding space for people trying to argue that being overweight/obese is not a serious health issue. Like, we need to treat it like smoking: no, you’re not a bad person for smoking, but smoking is bad for your health and quitting is good.

    I honestly think there’s a lack of personal responsibility among folks—particularly online—who simply refuse to see anything wrong with themselves and think all lifestyles are equally valid no matter what.

    Idk, as someone who’s struggled with being overweight since childhood, it really bugs me to try to reframe obesity as something that’s not a serious health problem and that society needs to accommodate certain unhealthy life choices. Again comparing with smoking, I’m very very VERY glad that stores/restaurants now ban smoking indoors. Sucks for the smokers, sure, but society does not need to accommodate all ways of life—particularly those that are straight up unhealthy. If you want to adopt unhealthy behaviors, that’s on you; don’t make it my problem.

    Hey, at least being fat doesn't create an aura of stench that makes anyone nearby miserable.

  • Just yesterday I was discussing this issue with my wife. Here we have "Physical Education" in schools, which is mostly kids doing exercises or some kind of sport activity in school, a couple of hours per week. This is surely fine, but I'd also like kids being taught the right way to eat, things to avoid, things to limit... I think it would be an investment for the future, which could avoid a lot of problems related to bad eating habits.

    Wtf? You arent taught this? I learned it growing up in Canada and my kids are too, here in Japan.

  • Wtf? You arent taught this? I learned it growing up in Canada and my kids are too, here in Japan.

    I'm pretty positive that, although teacher may casually mention it, that's not a specific topic in school. And it should be.

  • I’m a little done holding space for people trying to argue that being overweight/obese is not a serious health issue. Like, we need to treat it like smoking: no, you’re not a bad person for smoking, but smoking is bad for your health and quitting is good.

    I honestly think there’s a lack of personal responsibility among folks—particularly online—who simply refuse to see anything wrong with themselves and think all lifestyles are equally valid no matter what.

    Idk, as someone who’s struggled with being overweight since childhood, it really bugs me to try to reframe obesity as something that’s not a serious health problem and that society needs to accommodate certain unhealthy life choices. Again comparing with smoking, I’m very very VERY glad that stores/restaurants now ban smoking indoors. Sucks for the smokers, sure, but society does not need to accommodate all ways of life—particularly those that are straight up unhealthy. If you want to adopt unhealthy behaviors, that’s on you; don’t make it my problem.

    I pretty much agree.

    The only thing I would add is that it's not our place to tell others to lose weight or to point out their weight; people already know they are overweight and that it's unhealthy. We shouldn't be policing other people's bodies.

    It's also possible to be overweight and have body positivity; being overweight doesn't equate to being unattractive.

  • Lighter, Stronger, Smarter: The Rise of Syntactic Foams

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
  • 93 Stimmen
    35 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    D
    Same as American companies. Send you targeted ads and news articles to influence your world view as a form of new soft power.
  • 197 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    S
    Sure: for professionals. However when casually commenting in a forum it is fine because the reader can go check the citations (and perhaps come back and add to the thread).
  • 43 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Telegram partners with xAI to bring Grok to over a billion users

    Technology technology
    36
    1
    38 Stimmen
    36 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    R
    So you pay taxes to Putin. Good to know who actually helps funding the regime. I suggest you go someplace else. I won't take this from a jerk from likely one of the countries buying fossil fuels from said regime, that have also supported it after a few falsified elections starting in 1996, which is also the year I was born. And of course "paying taxes to Putin" can't be even compared to what TG is doing, so just shut up and go do something you know how to do, like I dunno what.
  • 33 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    J
    Apparently, it was required to be allowed in that state: Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it's entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn't actually have grounds to deny it. No jury during that phase, so it's just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions. It's gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted. From: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/18471175 influence the sentence From what I've seen, to be fair, judges' decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would've been otherwise.
  • Apple Eyes Move to AI Search, Ending Era Defined by Google

    Technology technology
    2
    10 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    ohshit604@sh.itjust.worksO
    It’s infuriating that Safari/Apple only allows me to choose from five different search engines. I self-host my own SearXNG instance and have to use a third-party extension to redirect my queries.