I always thought that Igglepiggle was a visitor to the night garden, but it has been some years (and I was fairly sleep deprived), so I no longer remember why I think that.

UK Netflix needs to go do a show like Adolescence about Mumsnet.

I feel like brainrot might have a more specific meaning? Or at least, it seems to have specific connotations among the 10 yr olds I know.

Mine's not a great pic, as it was taken from a high-up window, but I spotted a similarly aged one through in Glasgow a couple of months back:

bsky.app/profile/haet...

Sure, but that's because he's a misogynist. Outside of the context of rebutting misgendering, it just reinforces the misogyny.

Yes. It needs to be done with care though, as it could easily veer into (trans)misogyny. Like, just calling a man a woman is already a misogynistic insult. But done pointedly and deliberately - as it seems to be in this example - it's effective.

I'm struggling to get my head around it. Like, what did he *mean* by it? Does he want us to think he's fash, or does he somehow think that context and connotations aren't a thing? Utterly baffled.

Thanks for sharing this, it sparked a really good conversation with my kid. She periodically gets sucked in by freemium games, and this really helps to explain that phenomenon too.

Happy birthday!

Ie, it'd be naive to think the big corporations will save us, but maybe some could provide a useful delay? Plus I think many creatives see it more as enforcing existing copyright rather than further restricting it. I don't really know what I'm arguing though, as I can't see what *would* be effective

Yes..? (I've been utterly brain-befogged til today, this is the most I've thought about anything all week, so the articulation is difficult, but) copyright is definitely a blunt tool, but will feel more status quo-ey in contrast to Big Scary AI (which is controlled by even fewer huge corporations)

Yes. Though I sympathise with the impulse of the copyright argument. There've been a lot of prominent "this will catastrophically harm something profoundly important" arguments that have dismally failed lately. It would all feel easier if you felt you could rely on the law.

That said, I'm not sure the philosophical argument is particularly worth having, when all the very practical damage you mention also exists. Plus the misinformation issues that are already bad enough without machines getting involved.

I agree that it's a greyer area than people say, but I don't agree it's just automating what artists do. For me the distinction is the ability to form original thought - which obviously gets deeply philosophical very quickly - but for me, I believe that's something that people can do and AI can't.

Oh, you absolutely can. Whether you *should* is entirely different.

I know this because I would request it - at a time when I was young enough to call it "pezzy melk" - and for some reason my parents (or perhaps sisters?) were foolish enough to oblige.

Yes, it does curdle. Yes, I drank it anyway.

I think it's like the herb / herb thing where they're using an older pronunciation. I reckon it feels especially weird because it's not a word you often hear in an American accent, whereas you hear it in plenty of other accents that pronounce it "right".

I also really enjoyed the sign on the building next to the gate, which has by some distance outlasted both the council and, seemingly, the car park that it refers to.