Bold of you to assume they believe in controversial hypotheses like “latitude”.

It’s definitely not a pipe

Who exactly are you shouting at, as if everything you’re saying isn’t obvious as day?

“Haute cuisine is dead! When was the last time you walked into a restaurant and saw aspic on the menu? When was the last time you heard of somebody serving aspic? Once aspics weren’t weird, they were the hottest fashion!”

^ That’s you.

Trying to define the relevancy and lifeline of music as a whole based on the popularity of pub folk music is crazy.

More people are making music today than ever before, as barriers monetary, technological, and knowledge-based only continue to lower with time. I have no idea how you’ve managed to draw the opposite conclusion.

New music is thriving. There is more music of almost every style and genre imaginable being released today than ever before. What’s dead is traditional music distribution channels and marketing avenues like radio, and the popular means of promoting music now reward the most dogshit meme-able content. But if you seek out music yourself, the modern era is a paradise of incredible music; don’t blame music itself for the failures of the industry to reward good within it.

That’s fair. This may be it then; as somebody who sort of “speed ran” childhood due to my circumstances it might just be hard for me to understand and relate to the normal developmental cycle and the impact of such things during it. Thanks for the perspective, cheers.

I’m sure this had profound impact, but frankly we all lived through it so I find it hard to accept as the sole or majority-dominant reason alone, personally.

I don’t disagree, but unfortunately nobody granted me authority on the general consensus on this one. I will say though that lineagial generations feel like only one possible definition, and cultural generations defined by common cultural experience (as is the case we’re discussing) feel like they have some validity for me as well.

Usenet, irc, forums etc were like an early training ground hardening us against the purveyors of bullshit. When bullshit became the business of billionaire corporations online we were ready for it. They never had a chance…

I think there is a lot to this. One of the big divides I’ve noticed is that these younger zoomers seems to conflate what is socially acceptable with what is advertiser-friendly, and I have to assume a lot of that comes from growing up in these heavily corporate-controlled spaces in comparison to the “wild west” of the internet that raised us.

I agree with this, but what made this different then our generation or early zoomers? I was raised online as a house with an internet-connected home PC in the early-to-mid 90s with two parents who worked until night; there were grifters and proto-manosphere groups then and I’m sure moreso for the early zoomers, so I have to assume there was either some change in the methodology behind the delivery in these messages or, more likely, some change in the parental oversight, but I can’t identify exactly when or what

Convenient as that potentially would be, that does not seem to be the popular understanding, and I see no reason not to use to the conventional understanding in a case where stubbornness is unlikely to shift said understanding.

Hopefully unnecessarily preemptive “if you don’t like Wikipedia” invitation to websearch using the engine of your choice and observe the general response without hunting for a cherry-pickable example which defines them as such.

edit: i noticed you were downvoted and feel compelled to mention that I did not downvote you; it’s weird to downvote people for normal conversation.

Of course, it just seems to me like there’s a more distinct mid-generation cultural shift rather than just technological in comparison to our generation, and I am curious about potential catalysts. But again, I can only speak from my experience and personal exposure, so there is the possibility of locality specificity as well as other variables, so everyone remember I am just a layman and weigh my experience anecdotally rather than definitively.

That has not been my experience, no. I am speaking younger adults, not teenagers; I don’t really have many interactions with teenagers or children these days so I don’t have enough experience with alphas to have really any sort of opinion on them. As I understand it, Gen A starts after 2010, so any adult today would still be a Zoomer. Granted of course that “generations” are a loosely-defined concept so the years they are defined as may vary, but it is my understanding that the typical understanding of Zoomer goes as far as 2010 at least.

I think Zoomers need a generational divide in their generation, tbh. In my experience, older Zoomers are intelligent, capable, motivated, and largely leftist. For some unknown reason though, younger Zoomers are ignorant, prudish, too easily contented, and weirdly conservative. I have yet to understand what happened to cause the divide, and I can’t point to any stats or evidence to support this belief, but anecdotally I have noticed this trend within my own life and spheres of influence.

And it’s beyond obvious in the way LLMs are conditioned, especially if you’re used them long enough to notice trends. Where early on their responses were straight to the point (inaccurate as hell, yes, but that’s not what we’re talking about in this case) today instead they are meandering and full of straight engagement bait - programmed to feign some level of curiosity and ask stupid and needless follow-up questions to “keep the conversation going.” I suspect this is just a way to increase token usage to further exploit and drain the whales who tend to pay for these kinds of services, personally.

There is no shortage of ethical quandaries brought into the world with the rise of LLMs, but in my opinion the locked-down nature of these systems is one of the most problematic; if LLMs are going to be the commonality it seems the tech sector is insistent on making happen, then we really need to push back on these companies being able to control and guide them in their own monetary interests.

I loved Cracked so much before they fired everyone who people liked 7 years ago.

deleted by creator

It’s not exactly the same, and it’s been a long time now, but watching Grace Helbig go from DailyGrace with a vaguely male-catering focus and general no fucks given attitude into becoming Grace Helbig, Internet Big Sister for zoomer girls, was pretty jarring.

Advertisers didn’t change queer people, queer people changed advertisers.

You’re not immune to marketing and conditioning. It’s not a one-way street, it’s two-way.

How can someone have lots of sex without being pro-sex?

I dunno, maybe ask the Catholic Church, or the Mormon Church, or any other famously anti-sex organization that promotes heavy breeding but still uses harmful shame tied to sex as a a means of control?

You’re incorrectly conflating the idea of doing sexual things in general and the idea of doing sexual things in public; most Pride events are less overtly sexual now than they were in the past, but that’s not a reduction to the original goals of Pride.

No, I’m not. You’re conflating being pro-sex with being sexually active.

I don’t really understand what you’re trying to say, if I’m being honest.

I will say though that having sex and being pro-sex are two extremely different things, and the existence of one does not in any way imply the existence of the other.