M1ch431

Thanks for making it clear that you aren't being hateful.

From my perspective, you don't need to parrot a line or respond to a barrage of questions.

Learning to be more sensitive and tolerant and actually changing takes time. It's a process. If you indeed aren't holding hate in your heart, it makes it all the easier to see the flip side.

Sorry. It's one word. That's literally ALL people want you to say to help them feel safe and comfortable. It doesn't need to be hard.

Should your private message have been published? No, probably not. It was unfair to you.

Are people being unfair to accuse you of being a massive transphobe with the evidence at hand? I'd say so, but people are primed against people that hint at their transphobia through the use of particular terms.

And why wouldn't they be? Individuals masking extreme hate towards transgender/etc. people with dogwhistles is something that happens frequently.

If you aren't masking hate just say so and apologize.

Thank you for creating this platform. It's a critically needed service for discourse. I hope others reconsider their strong stances against you and Dessalines.

Lemmy is of incredible value to humanity and not a moment passes where I am not grateful for this platform and the hard work put into it. I'm sure many, many others feel similarly.

Can you please just apologize to those who were offended and promise to be more sensitive moving forward? That's the sure-fire way to defuse the allegations accusing you of being a transphobe and put everybody at ease.

Refraining to comment further on the topic is smart until you learn more about the dynamics at hand. Transgender individuals face an unprecedented amount of discrimination and vitriol.

If anything, the bourgeoisie are generally polarizing people against each other, particularly pitting people against others who are different or who are in vulnerable positions.

Still, doesn't change the gross hiring (and firing practices) of UX professionals. The field is being done away with, largely. The value they provided arguably exceeded value that even c-suite level executives provided to their company, yet usually these professionals have no stake in the company or seat at the table, unless they work at a start-up. Their value was exploited, and their reward is being fired while the company thrives.

Of course the talent shines through, but these individuals will have to vastly "up-skill" (perform new functions or skip their established practices instead potentially relying on AI) to be able to continue in product development.

Hiring managers do allude that some of these professionals will be moved to management or strategy positions, but the vast majority will be jobless if they can't adapt, if they already aren't jobless. Even with a masters in UX and/or many years of experience, it's very difficult to find a role.

AI hasn't outright replaced anyone in the field, but its effect on the workforce has been undeniable. Whether they are building a house of cards or not remains to be seen, but the people who have spent decades working in specialized UX roles will likely be the ones taking the hit in the end.

Will anybody be surprised that capitalism is further leaning into enshittification with the removal of these roles? No, I don't think anybody will be shocked.

They are desperately trying to replace skilled and creative individuals with AI, and I suspect workplaces that enforce or coerce the use of AI (particularly specialized AI products) are using the training data to enable this pursuit.

For example in the User Experience field (or what's left of it), the professionals are incredibly valuable to companies that had forsaken empathy and user-centered design in their processes — they filled a sorely needed gap in product development. And go figure, you need users to be able to smoothly use your product and want to engage with your services as easily as possible to make money. No wonder the ROI of employing UX professionals is so high.

Because some of the UX design processes can be replicated by AI though, I'd argue that the the field is largely being shifted in reaction to that advancement.

UX professionals are assured that their field isn't being replaced by AI — repeatedly and incessantly by hiring managers (who spent years bloating the field and watering down the value of UX).

UX professionals are just being shifted to taking even more responsibilites by ALSO being expected to do UI design. I'd say, in part, because AI can perform some of the surface level tasks UX professionals are known for. UX encompasses a lot more positions than design, such as being a researcher or writer. It's all important work.

But before long, hiring managers foreshadow that they want to completely do away with the UX/UI role and shift them to Product Development/Management.

How could one wear so many hats? Likely with the use of AI to accomplish their tasks. This shift will likely include the firing of a lot of individuals (which these corporations already have done for years — they suck UX professionals of all their value and then let them go).

I have debated hiring managers of large companies and they seem pretty determined to put the entire field out of work. A field that is of incredible value to humanity. They say because it's a "mature field" that has well-established design practices that others can tap into.

When pressed, these individuals claim that the field already doesn't even exist anymore, and that people should just move on.

Like it or not, we can shine a light and hope they see.

I am as libertarian (as opposed to authoritarian) as they come, and I still hope I (and others who share my sentiment) will be able to convince them the merits of a world with human rights, diplomacy, and freedom — that is not needlessly violent and forceful.

We can move past barbarism, but to do so we must define what comes next to those who have shut their hearts to the truth — especially to those who have spent arguably too much time reliving the horrific violence of the 20th century.

I don't need to boycott them, I don't feel the need to block them. Everybody is within their rights to do so though, but I will keep slowly trying to win them over to the idea of a more kind and free world.

Creating Lemmy and the fediverse is of incredible value to humanity. They provided a timely medicine to the internet — a decentralized platform that is not controlled by an American corporation and ruled by algorithms. I don't feel like it's a lost cause to do my best.

The best thing to prepare is to not be fearful and to not panic.

I suggest that everybody protest against factory farming and participate in boycotts. Call lawmakers and regulators to take direct action against these companies and their dangerous practices (and hold them responsible).

100%. I'm hopeful that with increased awareness more people will wake up to the reality at hand and take action. There has to be a breaking point where people finally realize they are being manipulated to be polarized, outraged, fearful, hateful, etc. by an uncaring apparatus that just wants to maintain the status quo (or whatever their particular agenda is) and steal their attention, largely.

Truly, thanks for your response - I understand now that it does seem to be one of the major factors that goes into their ranking.

I guess my problem is that I just feel like ranking press freedom is flawed when things are this fucked. Here in the US, whistleblowers are persecuted or killed, accurate and unbiased reporting of events feels like it almost never happens, omission of newsworthy events is rampant, an oligarch is directly controlling speech in their outlet, independent journalism is at the behest of a few corporations that have total control of the algorithms and the platforms that these journalists rely on, a couple corporations own the entirety of all mainstream media... I could go on, but I'd just be preaching to the choir in all likelihood.

I'm glad that the few (independent or otherwise) journalists aren't dying in droves here. They just get fired or silenced through various mechanisms if they report on anything that goes against the grain.

I am pretty sure their assessment of US press freedom is wrong. In my opinion, it should be ranked much lower than 57th. Perhaps their assessment is true when you consider the facts of the entire world situation, but media freedom and actual journalism feels pretty dead here.

It doesn't feel like they are accounting for the entire breadth facts at hand here when it comes to industry/capital/political pressure on media bias/accuracy and their combined effects on reporting (or the lack thereof).