Queers and Beers.

[Rorschach]

LOL
piss off and count your own I's fool.

[Warrior]

LOL
piss off and count your own I's fool.

Oh now we are on to the F word eh?

Fool.

You know why do I need to pay for cable when I have YOU to entertain me so generously??

I mean I am literally watching you fall apart right in front of me as you resort to name calling a man who would be willing to HELP YOU if you asked?

Rorry quit before you lose all dignity.

Warrior.

[Neferti]

Usually they aren't friends either Nef.
But they seem oblivious to the fact that I don't mind.
Rorschach was one of the Watchmen.

and remember this....



from WallE... also used as an avatar.

I'd forgotten about that avatar ... so that's why the nickname "roach" has remained?

[boxy]

Oh no! Such confusion! Poor babies.

[Rorschach]

Usually they aren't friends either Nef.
But they seem oblivious to the fact that I don't mind.
Rorschach was one of the Watchmen.

and remember this....



from WallE... also used as an avatar.

I'd forgotten about that avatar ... so that's why the nickname "roach" has remained?

Nope... that was the reason I changed my avatar at the time to a roach.

[Outlaw Yogi]

As I keep iterating, homosexuality (in males) is a genetic defect [so in effect a disease] caused by inbreeding, just like epilepsy, schizophrenia and haemophilia. That's why the same afflictions often overlap in the same individual, because they have the same cause. So you wind up with gay schizos (quite common) epileptic haemophiliacs, haemophiliac gays ect ect. It's also why royal families have a high proportion of these diseases.

I've also been stating that as public political sentiment is like a pendulum swinging back and forth, when the political elites' agendas sway too far one way, the public backlash almost always sways in the opposite direction to an even greater extreme - easiest example in modern history to cite is how the Weimar Republic became Nazi Germany.

So with human societies' history of going full circle regarding social issues, it's only natural legalisation of same sex marriage will result in the re-criminalisation of homosexual acts.
My prediction is that once homosexuality is outlawed again, prospective parents will be DNA screened for genetic defects, and the abnormalities corrected.

Meanwhile much of the world is subject to the robot revolution and artificial intelligence.
Q: So what would a robot think about gays? - A: Does not compute.
Obviously the robots will regard homosexuality as irrational.

Well Queirdos, it seems you're doomed regardless. Because soon you won't have to worry about people like me presuming you're effeminate voice exposes your poo jabbing desires. Now a robot can pick it through facial recognition.

Stanford researchers built a 'gaydar' for photos -- and it reveals something disturbing about facial recognition technology
http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/techandsc ... ocid=wispr

Facial recognition technology may catch a lot more in a photo than a winning smile or sparkling eyes.

Psychologist Michal Kosinski and his colleague Yilun Wang at the Stanford Graduate School of Business caused a stir last month when they suggested that artificial intelligence could apply a sort of "gaydar" to profile photos on dating websites.

In a forthcoming paper in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, the two researchers revealed how existing facial recognition software could predict whether or not someone identifies as gay or straight just by studying their face.

Comparing two white men's dating profile pictures side-by-side, an existing computer algorithm could determine with 81% accuracy whether or not a person self-identified as gay or straight. The researchers used an existing facial recognition program called VGG Face to read and code the photos, then entered that data into a logistic regression model and looked for correlations between the photo features and a person's stated sexual orientation.

Kosinski said it's not clear which factors the algorithm pinpointed to make its assessments -- whether it emphasised certain physical features like jaw size, nose length, or facial hair, or external features like clothes or image quality.

But when given a handful of a person's profile photos, the system got even savvier. With five pictures of each person to compare, facial recognition software was about 91% accurate at guessing whether men said they were gay or straight, and 83% accurate when determining whether women said they were straight or lesbian. (The study didn't include those who self-reported as 'bisexual' or daters with other sexual preferences.)

People were furious about the news, which was first reported in The Economist.

"Stanford researchers tried to create a 'gaydar' machine," The New York Times wrote. The Human Rights Campaign and the LGBTQ advocacy group GLAAD denounced the research, calling it "dangerous and flawed." In a joint statement, the two organisations lambasted the researchers, saying their study wasn't peer reviewed (though it was) and suggesting the findings "could cause harm to LGBTQ people around the world."

Lead study author Kosinski agrees that the study is cause for concern. In fact, he thinks what's been overlooked amidst the controversy is the fact that his discovery is disturbing news for everyone. The human face says a surprising amount about what's under our skin, and computers are getting better at decoding that information.

"If these results are correct, what the hell are we going to do about it?" Kosinski said to Business Insider, adding, "I'm willing to take some hate if it can make the world safer."

AI technology appears to be hyper-capable of learning all sorts of information about a person's most intimate preferences based on visual cues that the human eye doesn't pick up. Those details could include things like hormone levels, genetic traits and disorders, even political leanings -- in addition to stated sexual preferences.

Kosinski's findings don't have to be bad news, though.

The same facial recognition software that sorted gay and straight people in the study could also be trained to mine photos of faces for signs of depression, for example. Or it could one day help doctors measure a patient's hormone levels to identify and treat diseases faster and more accurately.

What's clear from Kosinski's research is that to a trained computer, photos that are already publicly available on the internet are fair game for anyone to try to interpret with AI. Indeed, such systems could already be in use on images floating across computer screens around the world, without anyone being the wiser.

[Black Orchid]

And so it goes on ...

Gay couples - but not straight ones - will be able to marry for free in some of the City of Sydney's most prominent buildings and parks, in a move that will outrage the progressive council's conservative critics.

A motion passed on Monday night will allow same-sex couples to hire community facilities, halls and parks for free for 100 days if same-sex marriage is legalised following the postal survey.

The offer will only be available for same-sex weddings, but existing bookings for straight couples will not be cancelled or moved to accommodate the expected influx.

Gay couples will still need to pick up the tab for audio visual services, catering and security, but will be able to hire facilities such as Paddington Town Hall free of charge.

Liberal councillor Christine Forster - who is gay and has taken a leading role in the "yes" campaign -voted against the motion after unsuccessfully trying to make it apply to straight couples as well.

"This has been a fight for equality before the law and it's my belief that we can't ask for equality for ourselves and then deny it to others," she said.

"It's also been about making marriage inclusive not exclusive, and this motion flies in the face of that."

http://www.camdenadvertiser.com.au/stor ... legalised/

I agree with Christine. 'Equality'? I don't think so.

[BigOl64]

And so it goes on ...

Gay couples - but not straight ones - will be able to marry for free in some of the City of Sydney's most prominent buildings and parks, in a move that will outrage the progressive council's conservative critics.

A motion passed on Monday night will allow same-sex couples to hire community facilities, halls and parks for free for 100 days if same-sex marriage is legalised following the postal survey.

The offer will only be available for same-sex weddings, but existing bookings for straight couples will not be cancelled or moved to accommodate the expected influx.

Gay couples will still need to pick up the tab for audio visual services, catering and security, but will be able to hire facilities such as Paddington Town Hall free of charge.

Liberal councillor Christine Forster - who is gay and has taken a leading role in the "yes" campaign -voted against the motion after unsuccessfully trying to make it apply to straight couples as well.

"This has been a fight for equality before the law and it's my belief that we can't ask for equality for ourselves and then deny it to others," she said.

"It's also been about making marriage inclusive not exclusive, and this motion flies in the face of that."

http://www.camdenadvertiser.com.au/stor ... legalised/

I agree with Christine. 'Equality'? I don't think so.

Under socialist ideology, some are more equal than others.

[cods]

its a joke isnt it and flies ion the face of equality..

imagine all those beautiful venues in Sydney being open all for free... its a bloody joke..

[Black Orchid]

And so it goes on ...

Gay couples - but not straight ones - will be able to marry for free in some of the City of Sydney's most prominent buildings and parks, in a move that will outrage the progressive council's conservative critics.

A motion passed on Monday night will allow same-sex couples to hire community facilities, halls and parks for free for 100 days if same-sex marriage is legalised following the postal survey.

The offer will only be available for same-sex weddings, but existing bookings for straight couples will not be cancelled or moved to accommodate the expected influx.

Gay couples will still need to pick up the tab for audio visual services, catering and security, but will be able to hire facilities such as Paddington Town Hall free of charge.

Liberal councillor Christine Forster - who is gay and has taken a leading role in the "yes" campaign -voted against the motion after unsuccessfully trying to make it apply to straight couples as well.

"This has been a fight for equality before the law and it's my belief that we can't ask for equality for ourselves and then deny it to others," she said.

"It's also been about making marriage inclusive not exclusive, and this motion flies in the face of that."

http://www.camdenadvertiser.com.au/stor ... legalised/

I agree with Christine. 'Equality'? I don't think so.

Under socialist ideology, some are more equal than others.

I know and this is what is bringing us down. What do we do?