Slashdot Mirror
Twitter To Developers: Please Love Us Again (mashable.com)
Twitter wants to fix its relationship with developers, it said Thursday. The company, which sold its developer platform to Google earlier this year, said moving forward it intends to be more transparent with developers and provide them with more insight. From a report: While some continue to call the end of Twitter (and others gave up on the product years ago), the company is prioritizing more tools for developers in order to grow the site. "These efforts represent a massive new engineering and product investment in the future of the Twitter API platform, and in our developer ecosystem," Andy Piper, Twitter's staff developer advocate, wrote in a blog post announcement. One of the steps involves creating an easier to use service overall. Twitter offers several developer products, including free APIs, services from data analysis group Gnip, and the enterprise-level Twitter API product. Twitter plans to simplify its offerings by releasing one way to get access to the Firehouse (access to all tweets in real-time), one way to access Twitter search, and one access for account activity.
Stop fucking around with the API and stop fucking around with access to it. You need to build trust and you can't do that when you change rules willy-nilly all the time.
The reason why developers fled your platform is because you never let it stabilize long enough for people to do things with it. Then, if memory serves, you closed it. And then you sold it.
So the question becomes one of why would anyone want to invest the time to figure the API and platform out if you're just going to pull the football away without warning?
Lets say, Donald Trump cures cancer, here is now the News Media will report it ..>
TRUMP FIRES DOCTORS!!!
MILLIONS OF DOCTORS OUT OF WORK!!!
RUSSIA HACKED CANCER!!!
Twitter, the problem is a fundamentally different one: Why bother with you?
Twitter was a very good platform to get points across quickly. You would say what you want and people could reply to it, could write short counterpoints to it, it was quite the place. A veritable "marketplace of ideas". And actually, the short format worked in the favor of this. Instead of writing an endless stream of words where the average reader's eyes glaze over somewhere in the middle (like, say, this wall of text here), you had to be terse and get your point across. Which allowed readers to quickly go down the list of replies and counterpoints, allowing a reader to get a really good grasp of a topic he was interested in and hearing many opinions, conflicting opinions that sometimes led to quite heated and interesting discussions.
That time is gone. Now that you can't even be sure anymore that you get to hear everyone. With shadowbans left and right, and some people outright getting banned to "make a point against different views, I mean, hate speech". Hate speech? Disagreeing with someone has become hate speech now? Don't get me wrong, if someone said that group X should be strung up, I could at least see the point, but we're talking about people whose "crime" was to disagree with someone and make them drop out of their echo chamber.
TL;DR: Twitter became irrelevant when not hurting someone's feelings became more important than hearing all sides of a story.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So ... both sides hate Twitter? A few postings up, we heard that it's just Trump's propaganda machine, here we get to learn that it's just Hillary's feel-good show.
Wow, even Fox News only managed to piss off one side of the political fence.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
One big problem with the Twitter API that I'm aware of is the requirement of an OAuth "consumer secret", which I've mentioned before.
Twitter's implementation of OAuth 1 requires each application to sign all requests with a private key that an application's developer is obligated to keep secret even from the application's users. This is fine for a web application that runs on a server. But a native application, particularly one distributed as free software, can't avoid exposing its private key to the user. Twitter can and does revoke keys that leak. Though most other services have switched to the more cookie-like OAuth 2 spec, which has an option to allow desktop applications to operate without a private key, Twitter has persisted in requiring this idiocy, which both the OAuth 1 and OAuth 2 RFCs discourage.
Does this new announcement include a move away from a mandatory "consumer secret" for applications that run on a desktop or mobile computer?
I honestly don't give a fuck what spectrum gets banned. For the record, I am a liberal. Leaning towards socialist even. Hey, I'm European, for the average American I'm probably a commie anyway.
But I DO want to hear what everyone has to say! Yes, that includes that I want you to be allowed that this Opportunist bastard should be dropped out of a plane without a parachute. I want you to be allowed to say that! I want you to be allowed to speak your mind, even if I think it's complete and utter bullshit!
I do reserve the right to reply to it, though. And I do expect that I get to be heard too. I am a firm believer in audiatur et altera pars, everyone has to be heard if you at least want to have a CHANCE to get to the true core of a problem.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Slashdot users have hated twitter since 2008, if willyhill's sockpuppet exposé is to be believed.
To start with, Twitter did not sell off "their API". They sold Fabric which was a tool to help others with app development, not developer access to Twitter.
Secondly, as far as I knew the number one hugest blocker to Twitter API use was Twitter not letting new developers have more than a tiny amount of allowed API calls, or rules around how much a client could write anyway (as the article alludes to). In fact there was a huge Kickstarter campaign that succeeded in part because this is one of the few developers on earth that has a key that allows them much larger numbers of users to post tweets.
I personally have some fun ideas for Twitter use in apps I'd love to try. With access to Twitter via API being limited though, I will never put forth the effort into making them happen. So has Twitter (or all Twitter) finally let developers write REAL twitter clients again that any number of people can use?
If not good luck and thanks for all the fish.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Can't wait to see what they're gonna censor next !
Even adding a phone number doesn't work. I tried adding my landline to the add_phone form today. But instead of Twitter reading out the verification code through text-to-speech the way my bank does, it produced a message "There was an error sending a text to that phone number. Please try again."
I agree that the shadow bans and such are really hurting Twitter. They certainly have curtained my use of it to an extent.
But the reason for developers to bother, is that if they write successful apps that increase Twitter use, that gives them leverage to ask Twitter to stop things like shadow bans. If nothing else things like shadowbans would complicate an API or alternately make the API appear not to work (when it will not fetch messages that are plainly there or sharing a link with others fails because Twitter has shadow banned the post) so such things will naturally be phased out if developer use of the API increased.
Twitter is not dead yet, and I would like to se them succeed if they can become a truly open platform again that does not discriminate against communication by chosen users.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I have exactly the opposite problem I don't care what anyone thinks and I don't want to hear from any of them. Same result though....
love is just extroverted narcissism
Develop your client and distribute it without keys. Then each user of the application can register on Twitter as a developer, register his own copy of the client as an application, and paste the keys that Twitter issues to that user into the client.
That's fine too. Hey, you do have that right to not listen to anyone, that's absolutely ok. But as far as I'm concerned I, and only I, should have the right to decide what I want to listen to and what not.
In turn, you, and only you, should have the right to decide what you want to listen to.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That's because they're doing a Yahoo! 10 years ago Yahoo! made a real effort to pull developers into it's ecosystem, and we saw what happened there. The fact is, it's hard (read impossible) to keep a fixed API when your (and your competition's) shit changes all the time. Keep it fixed == become stale. Change it all the time == unstable. Just look at the rapid succession of javascript libraries as an example.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
That's because he WOULD fire them, rather than re-deploy those doctors to tend to other medical needs.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
This commie Opportunist bastard should be dropped out of a plane without a parachute.
You can't handle the truth.
Amazon seems to manage it, just fine.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
You're in the minority now, sadly. I agree with what you're saying and I respect that sort of difference of opinion.
But you don't have to look far to find people who are trying to solve the problem of "abuse" by making sure some messages are never heard. I mean, just look at this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/02/unwanted-advances-on-campus-us-university-professor-laura-kipnis-interview
Unless perhaps I'm not keeping up and the Guardian is now considered Russian propaganda, it's quite dangerous to see how far this new trend has gone, wherein people find it injurious that they actually have to defend their (lack of) thinking and would much rather shut down all discussion via legal or extra-legal pathways.
Unlike Twitter, Amazon is actually useful sometimes. It sells stuff. Not an "experience."
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Let's say it continues on that my tweets cannot be seen. This is an account used to promote news of a particular interest. What good is the account to me now?
Next time, don't let someone insert themselves between you and your users. Get their email addresses.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I'm really looking forward to the launch of Micro.blog. I've supported the project, which will release a mobile client and a backend that simply build upon open stuff like RSS (which everyone and their mother supports).
Twitter doesn't have any attraction to me. It's just one big bucket of, well, of everyone. So as a consequence, it feels like I don't know anybody there.
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Helicopter, not plane. Not sure why, the things cost a fortune to run and are quite space limited, but it's always helicopters.
If you're consuming someone else's API to get at someone else's data, you're not a developer, you're a consumer.
Developers won't abandon a platform/service if there's money to be made. They'll jump through tons of hoops. Look at iOS and the AppStore. Look at Facebook. Twitter may have bungled their API repeatedly, but if the service and data were useful enough to develop for, developers would still do so.
Twitter killed itself with its politics, "Trust & Safety Council", ads, and incessant changes to the "feed" that make it harder to see shit from people you follow and filled your feed up with retweets, likes, and more ads.
All of this has led to fewer users and less "engagement" from the users who are still around. The internet keeps telling me that everyone has moved on to Snapchat for their pointless, daily trivialities (which is what Twitter was for).
Things started going downhill when they started putting limitations on third-party clients, like only allowing a limited number of user API keys and not providing new features to third parties, like polls for example.
Then after they did that, they slowly started making their official client worse and worse until it became unpleasant to use. If they ever kill off third parties like Tweetbot, that'll be the end of Twitter for me.
I wish they'd go back to encouraging and supporting third-party clients. If they want to put advertising requirements in, that's fine, as long as they don't stifle the platform. At the very LEAST they could make the official client better but I think that ship has sailed.
Fuck Twitter.
Maybe, just maybe, so much of the media coverage of Trump is negative because the things his administration is doing (or not doing) are perceived negatively by a large part of the population. Maybe it's because numerous things Trump promised to accomplish "on day one," or in the first month of his term, or in the first 100 days of his term haven't been done. Maybe it's because Americans are figuring out they prefer having imperfect health care as opposed to none at all, they kinda like having clean water that isn't full of coal fly ash, and they need those Amtrak trains to get to work. Maybe it's because every single day, more shady connections between Russia and the Trump camp are revealed, and the administration bungles more cover-up attempts. Maybe it's because the president looks outright incompetent having his appointees continually resigning, getting fired, recusing themselves, and finding themselves under investigation by the FBI. Maybe it's because the public doesn't quite approve of Trump's nepotistic despotism, or the very troubling appearance that he's christened his son-in-law to do an end run around various posts that are supposed to require Congressional approval.
Nahhh, can't be any of that; it's the (((librul media globalist elites))) who are the problem, right?
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
...and just after I wasted my mod points
Make America grate again!
Remember when Twitter shut down access to 3rd party access?
http://www.digitaltrends.com/m...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2...
http://news.softpedia.com/news...
http://www.eweek.com/developme...
Specific to developers: Do you really think mandatory mobile numbers on developer accounts will attract more developers? We do not want to give you number to share with your advertisment partners (as said in the ToS).
Raise the api limits, give us functions to access ALL twitter functions instead of a limited subset, rate limit but do not limit the age of date which can be retrieved. 200 DMs and that's all? What do you think how people should implement for example an archive function, if you only get the most recent DMs?!
Specific to every user: ..." sections in the timeline. After we DEACTIVATED the checkmark to have an algorithmic timeline!
The app gets worse and worse and so does the webinterface. While twitter spared tweetdeck from the bullshit for a long time, stuff like broken reply function was implemented in tweetdeck very shortly after it was rolled out on the main webinterface.
Look how other sites have a working endless scroll and fix it! Reading 4 hours of tweets ago and then retweeting one and the site jumps back to top? W.T.F!
And try to grasp the concept of threads. You never ever had a working implementation of displaying threads. Either stop trying and limit it to top-post and replies or get a nice threaded view!
Accept, that people want chronological timelines. We do not need or want "while you were away" "you could like
And finally: Get the concept of consent!
The "while you were away" section first had "did you like this yes/no" (clicking no had NO effect), then it were changed to "show me this less often" (where is the fucking NO button? And it isn't shown less often when you click) and now the "show me less often" option is moved into a nicely hidden menu (click the v on the top left), still without having any effect. I guess the "option" will vanish completely soon.
So, when you start loving your users again, the users and developers (who are also users) may love you again. Try not to fuck up, it's not like twitter isn't dying more and more anyway.
I leave it to other people here to complain about some annoying groups dominating twitter trying to force their rules on it.
I'm am probably the exact ideological opposite of you fiscally and socially, but in this we are in 100% complete agreement. Not bad for a commie ;)
Additionally, the best antisceptic for rotten ideas is to expose it to sunlight. The more people out there that can see how amazingly flippant an idiot is, the more ridicule they will get.
Twitter is capricious with its bans. It bans people for saying offensive things, but doesn't ban them for saying threatening or dangerous things.
I abhor hate speech, and I actually support my country's ban on it. I believe speech can be weaponized; advocating for the extermination of a person or people on the basis of race or orientation or whatever shouldn't be protected speech. (Don't argue with me about this; I don't care what you think in this regard. I'm just giving this preamble as context, not to invite any discussion on the matter. I mean, post if you want, but I'm not going to read any of it.)
The problem with Twitter is that because they're so useless on their own and haven't allowed anyone to make useful tools for the service, people that I *do* want to hear--usually women--are driven off the service because of the unending firehose of rape and death threats. Police don't take those seriously, and neither does twitter, and so the system becomes unusable for anyone at the receiving end of that. I don't think that's an acceptable use of a service.
IF Twitter had provided appropriate tools from the beginning (shared block lists, tools to filter out threats and random hateful garbage, etc.) this would all be a non-issue. The all-speech-is-free crowd could go off and do what they want, and the people that are just trying to live their lives without hearing how they should be raped to death could ALSO use the space as they want. Instead, Twitter lashed out in all directions at none, ineffectually banning people but not making the system any better for anyone.
If you're going to provide a platform for free speech (and for twitter, I fall on the side of more speech being better often because it means repressed populations may actually get heard), you also need to provide tools for some people to make sure they only have to hear what they want to.
Actually the US president neither gets to "fire" doctors nor does he get to "redeploy" them; much as you may be lusting to have every country be a shitty as Cuba or Venezuela, the US isn't there yet.
Who knew!
"also you are banned for using the right pronouns and for blaspheming our Prophet (pbuh)."
Shit, I created a new business account this morning and got banned for uploading a profile pic (no funny business, just my business logo). It was tagged as "suspicious activity". I tried to reactive it but my business phone number (which I've had for 13 years now) is "unsupported" for a phone call or SMS to confirm.
I had the account open for, I think two minutes before getting banned. So, really, pronoun use and blasphemy must just be if you're not trying hard enough. Be a real rebel and complete your account profile!
I can't imagine how much fun it is to interface with their backend if this is the way the frontend works.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Twitter plans to simplify its offerings by releasing one way to get access to the Firehouse
Are you certain it is not "firehose" instead?
Hmm. I disagree, care to present your argument for it? Mine against it would, at least for now, be that I enjoy living.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Only bad ideas require censorship for survival. If you need proof for that, take a look at any dictatorship in history.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Odd. I would consider myself "left". And it's likely I make more money than you. Yes, even after those insane European taxes.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Sure he can fire them - just cut their funding. Medicaid, medicare, research, orphan drug programs, aid to 3rd world countries ... you think all these programs are self-financing and make enough of a profit to pay doctors?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
None of those programs employ doctors.
I think those programs are one of the major reasons doctors are leaving the profession. They are also one of the major reasons American health care is so outrageously expensive and comparatively ineffective or even harmful.
E.g., https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
So, cutting funding for those programs would probably be quite good for both doctors and patients.
Really? None of those programs employ doctors? Medicare and medicaid don't pay the doctor's bills at the hospital, etc? Those 14 million people who would have lost medical coverage if the Republicans had their way cutting funding, they wouldn't have been able to afford to see a doctor. So, the doctor wouldn't have been paid. Are you intentionally stupid or did you get dropped on your head?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
They pay doctors, they don't employ them.
Even if that were true, it wouldn't mean that Trump can "fire" those people, so your statement is wrong. If you meant that they might not get paid, then you should have said that.
Of course, it's not true anyway. Without those shitty, inefficient, crony-capitalist programs, medical care would be more affordable and demand for it would go up.
Well, except that people like you wouldn't get free sex change operations. But fortunately, there isn't a lot of demand for those to begin with.
And how are they going to pay those doctors if they can't bill patients? And all those doctors running their own clinics - if they can't bill medicare/medicaid, they're not going to be able to have as many doctors in their group, It's not just hospitals. So doctors out of work, by Trump cutting funding - the exact mechanism I said.
You're a moron if you can't follow the chain of cause and effect. Or are you going to argue that Trump's cuts to the EPA aren't going to result in people being fired/laid off/out of a job?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
We're not talking about cause and effect here, we're talking about "firing". "Firing" is something employers do to employees. Trump can't "fire" doctors because he doesn't employ them. End of story. Your hare-brained theories about what the consequences of ending Medicare would be are irrelevant to the question of whether doctors are employees of Trump.
Well, I suppose you are to be forgiven for your economic delusions, being effectively a ward of the state. However, markets generally expand, not shrink, when government involvement is reduced. Furthermore, demand for essential health care is highly inelastic, so people will find ways to pay physicians. (Note that physicians' salaries are about 8% of total health care spending.)
Unlike physicians, EPA employees are actually government employees, so Trump can fire them. Unlike physicians, their skills also have little value in the free market. So, he can fire them, they will have to change careers, and that's a good thing. Keeping my fingers crossed here.
Yes, we ARE talking cause and effect. Cuts to budgets result in firings. The cause is the person doing the budget cuts - not the person tasked with doing the actual termination.
Demand for medical services isn't "inelastic." Go watch "Sicko". Or look at the people who can't afford to see a doctor because the co-pay is too high. People do NOT "always find ways to pay physicians." Otherwise, they wouldn't need medicare and medicade - many, before they got covered by one of these two plans, hadn't seen a doctor in decades even though they had chronic diseases.
Why don't you go live in your libertarian paradise - Somalia has no government interference, you can do whatever you want and you won't pay taxes or have to worry about other people on medicare.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
"Resulting in firings" isn't the same as "firing". If I stop going to my local neighborhood cafe and it closes, I didn't "fire" anybody.
Medicare and Medicaid aren't free; people pay for them. They cost several times as much as they should cost and are not sustainable. They also only spend around 8% on physician salaries. So, eliminating and replacing them with something more efficient would mean that people spend less on healthcare and have the ability to spend more on physicians. Of course, since most Americans have been paying into these systems without ever getting any benefit, they would have to be compensated for the money they lost, probably around $100000 for the average American worker close to retirement.
It was socialism that turned Somalia into the shithole it is today, and despite all the decades-long chaos that usually goes along with the fall of socialist regimes, in the case of Somalia, life actually seems to be improving there now that socialism is gone.
When I search for you on Google, and based on your posting history, you appear to be an out-of-work transsexual living in Canada. So why don't you worry about extracting free stuff from Canadians instead instead of chiming in on US politics? You have made your bed, now lie in it.
Maybe it's because every single day, more shady connections between Russia and the Trump camp are revealed, and the administration bungles more cover-up attempts.
You clearly haven't gotten the left-wing talking points memo. Now that Trump has bombed Syria, you are supposed to be upset that Trump is provoking Russia too much, not that Trump is being too friendly with Russia.
Never said Medicare and Medicade were free - just that some people would not see a doctor if it weren't for them.
Now as to your personal attacks on me - I'm retired, bozo. Here people have the right to retire at 60, and given the state of my health, it was inevitable. Or are you going to characterize everyone who's retired as "out-of-work"? Same as you tried to characterize us as "practically wards of the state"?
I'll "chime in on US politics" as much as I damn well please. You see, freedom of speech isn't an American invention - and isn't being upheld too well in the US, what with FISA warrants, 100-mile border search zones where probable cause isn't needed for a search, etc. That "zone" covers 2/3 of the population. You need other countries that rank higher on freedom to remind you of what you've lost. In that respect, Canada has a freedom score of 99, and the US 89. That means 43 countries are more free than the US. No doubt it will get worse when next year's ratings come out. Or if you want something that makes the US look better, there's the 2016 rankings by the Cato Institute, where you're "only" 23rd.
Now as to my being a transsexual, that should be irrelevant, but it obviously is to you or you wouldn't have mentioned it. But why would you bother when my .sig makes it obvious and I haven't hidden it since I was outed here in 2006? Obviously, from the work you put into googling me and reviewing my posting history, I've struck multiple nerves. :-) Cry-baby.
It's so easy to troll libertarian-leaning retards - feels almost like te turn of the century again.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I didn't have to "review" anything; we both have been on the site for a decade.
You like Canada, great! I'm happy there is a place for people like you. I immigrated to the US by choice, and because it is different from Canada or Europe. I have never said anything about what Canada or Europe should do; I simply don't care. What I do care is that the US is different and stay different. Why do you have this compulsion to prove that the Canadian system is better? Why are you trying to change a country that you don't live in?
It is quite relevant in the context of medical costs and coverage, since it is a costly and life-long medical condition, and it goes to the core of your values and beliefs. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming here that if you're typical, your lifetime medical bills for you conditions have been substantial and that you didn't pay for them yourself.
I'm just wondering what's going on in the heads of people like you. Why do you believe that other people have a moral obligation to forego having kids or having a good retirement, just so that people like you can get costly, non-essential medical procedures done? Because that's what it ultimately comes down to.
And yet you admitted you googled me. Your words: "When I search for you on google". Stop lying, fool. And FYI, I've been here a lot longer than you. My first uid was 5 digits.
Type 1 diabetes is also a costly lifelong medical condition if treated, and fatal if not. Are you going to call for not treating those who can't pay the full cost for a genetic condition they were born with and did not choose? 30 years ago it cost me half my earnings. Now, we have universal mandatory pharmacare insurance here, so it's a flat fee, everyone pays, everyone's covered. Are you going to say that people who make claims against their insurance that exceed their premiums should be denied? See how hard it would be to sell an auto or house insurance policy on that basis.
How about victims of crime? I didn't ask to be sexually assaulted, I didn't ask for PTSD, anxiety disorder, or persistent depressive disorder with major depressive episodes. Should the victim be the one to bear the cost? Way to victimize someone a second time. You're a jerk.
An ignorant jerk. Gender reassignment surgery is considered an essential medical procedure. It prevents suicides. Look it up, asswipe.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I did. Gender reassignment surgery increases rates of suicide and psychiatric disorders. That's, in fact, consistent with your history of depression, sexual assault, and deep-seated anger.
You were indeed victimized, by parents, teachers, and a society that evidently didn't teach you what you needed to know. Life stories like yours are exactly why I believe the US should turn around and not go down the path of the social welfare state any further: your life didn't have to go this way.
You're so full of shit again. That study has been completely disproven. Come on - they cite sources from 1975. Subsequently, it's been established that the public's attitude played a huge role back then. Acceptance wasn't like it is today. The vast majority of studies show that post-transition, people's suicide rates are just slightly higher than the average population.
Anything is better than the 40% who want to kill themselves without proper treatment. In other words, people receiving proper treatment are at less risk of suicide.
But again, you're making a false deduction because that's what you want to do. Why? Because you're an ignorant asshole. My problems with depression are from several sources - as I have already pointed out. It's common in survivors of sexual assault, and also in people with PTSD - and that's me. It also doesn't help that my current endocrinologist is NOT following standard treatment guidelines, and put me on a drug that is known to cause depression and suicidal ideation without taking any counter-measures. He's an idiot, which is why I have an appointment with another endocrinologist in a couple of weeks. The serious depressive and suicidal ideation only started after he began treating me. So, apples and oranges. You also must have missed the murder - violent crimes tend to also cause PTSD, depression, etc. That started way back long before I began transition - more than 40 years ago, long before the term PTSD was even invented. Only got therapy for it 3 years ago, partly because I didn't know how to get help. But depression has been an on-again, off-again problem for most of my life, and has nothing to do with transsexuality and much to do with the events that caused PTSD.
Then there's the whole problem with vision loss. For a couple of years, I was mostly blind. Couldn't read, couldn't work, couldn't do much of anything. Severe vision impairment a known source of depression. And the bout of flesh-eating disease. And a few other medical problems (work accidents, etc).
Anyone who's gone through what I've been through would be affected - unless they're a sociopath. I'm not.
Now, pretty much everyone has relatives who pay taxes but don't have such a high need for medical and other support services. Why isn't it right and proper for them to insist that some of the taxes they pay help others in their family? Or do you believe that taxes are a one-way street - the government taketh, and the government giveth not? Creep.
But of course creeps like you hide behind the anonymity of the internet. It's what you do.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
The study is from 2011 and is the most highly cited study on the subject. If you have a more recent study, feel free to share it.
No, I think health care should be privatized and insurance based: the government should (usually) neither give nor take when it comes to healthcare. Government and charity should be reserved for people who are indigent and have no other options.
The only "deduction" I'm making is that your society has failed you, because your life is clearly not the path a life should take. I think you are a poster child for what is wrong with "liberal" progressive societies. In a decent. compassionate society, nobody should end up like you have ended up. And your obsession with bringing the same kind of system you live under to the US is evidently an attempt for you to cope with, and rationalize, your reality.
I will forgive your rudeness and insults because it's obvious you are suffering and you probably just don't know any better. I suggest that if you can't cope with opposing views, don't participate in US political discussions. But I will speak out when people like you advocate for bringing their dysfunctional societies and cultures to the US.
If I hadn't emigrated to the US as a young man, my life might have taken been wrecked in similar ways as yours. I cannot let views like yours stand without speaking out against them, because kids deserve better than what you got and what you are advocating for.
The study you and many fundy christians quoted is old (the previous century), and only has a total of 17 subjects. Here's one from 2012 with 889 subjects. It shows that suicidal ideation is mostly caused by rejection and lack of support before transition.
The study found that trans people are most at risk prior to social and/or medical transition and that, in many cases, trans people who require access to hormones and surgery can be left unsupported for dangerously long periods of time. The paper highlights the devastating impact that delaying or denying gender reassignment treatment can have and urges commissioners and practitioners to prioritise timely intervention and support.
There are plenty more that all say the same thing - hormones and surgery lower the individual's risk, as does social acceptance. It's assholes like you who are the cause of the high risk pre-transition.
Also, you don't think that voters and taxpayers should have a say in how their tax dollars are spent, and they shouldn't be allowed to vote for a public health carfe service. So much for democracy. Every other OECD country disagrees with you.
I am the rare exception - it's bound to happen statistically - where things just keep going wrong. Most people never have to deal with a murder, or flesh-eating disease. Half of all women have to deal with sexual assault - and that is the same in the US - so I'd say society is failing women in general.
And the benefits of a public health care system that covers everyone is pretty self-evident when you look at the stats
Here’s a fact most Canadians probably don’t know: Canadians live longer than people in the United States. Specifically, women in Canada live an average of 83 years, compared to 80 in the U.S.; men live more than 78 years on average compared to 75 in the United States. Why is this the case? There are clear links between mortality rates and the way countries invest in health care and improving social conditions.
Recently, we published a study in the American Journal of Public Health on the efficiency of health care systems at extending lives over the past two decades – and it’s good news for Canadians. For every additional hundred dollars spent on health care in Canada, per capita, life expectancy was extended by nearly two months. The same expenditures were only associated with less than half a month of increased life expectancy in the United States.
As you can see, public health care dollars go much further in extending lifespan than private healthcare dollars. So, why shouldn't people be allowed to vote to have their tax dollars spent more effectively via a public health care system that has been proven to be better than the US private health care system?
The study assessed the gains in life expectancy from health spending in 27 countries, as well as across genders within each nation. After controlling for economic development, social expenditures, and behavior, we found significant differences in international levels of efficiency. Canada ranked 8th of 27 countries, while the U.S. came in at 22nd.
Your system just doesn't deliver the bang for the buck. That's a fact. Sometimes the government CAN do things more efficiently than the private sector, and when it comes to people's health, it should. Profit shouldn't come first.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Actually, it has 324 sex reassigned subjects and 3240 controls. The study is from 2011, so it's not old. It does look at long-term effects of gender reassignment and objective criteria, which is a good thing. And suicides occur at significant rates until the end of the study, so you cannot explain the results by social changes.
That study is based on self-reported narrative of non-representative samples with no control group, apparently close to transition. It's been cited 4 times. I have no doubt that most people who go through transition will afterwards say that it was good for them. It's basic cognitive dissonance. It's meaningless in terms of outcomes.
So, your beliefs and statements remain contradicted by scientific facts.
To see what really went wrong in your case, one would have to look at your medical history in detail, but it is highly implausible that all these problems were unrelated and accidental; that would be extraordinary and would require extraordinary proof. In fact, many of the conditions you list are preventable and/or related.
(In fact, there is one area where there is clearly a relationship even based on the limited information you give: while you may think that transitioning to a woman decreased your risk of suicide, it clearly greatly increased your risk of sexual assault.)
Nice quote, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Greece and Israel spend half as much per capita than Canada and have longer life expectancies. In fact, if you look internationally, beyond about $2000/capita/year, there is no improvement in life expectancy. Another example of how your analysis doesn't make sense is if you look at life expectancy by race in the US. Asian-Americans and Latinos have longer life expectancies than Canadians, while white and African Americans have lower life expectancies.
Oh, that's quite true...
Medicare/Medicaid are government programs and account for about half of US health spending but only cover 1/3 of Americans, so this is clearly not true for the US. In fact, if we simply extended Medicare/Medicaid to the entire US population, it would spend about as much per American as the Canadian health care system spends per Canadian. The problem in the US is clearly that the public health care system isn't working well, and imposing it on more Americans clearly would make the problem worse.
Long life expectancy and health are largely determined by lifestyle choices, nutrition, and prevention, not medical care.
No - the original study that it quotes only has 17 subjects, and dates ton 1975. A second study it quotes is also from the '80s, and another portion is from the 90s. Social conditions have changed, and subsequent studies have found that the biggest determinators were lack of social acceptance and support, and delayed care. Learn to do proper research.
And obviously newer research will be less cited because it hasn't been around as long. Here's a simple test - go in person and talk to a specialist in the field who knows what they're talking about. Get the latest information and practices. Suicide rates now are barely above the general population post-surgery with proper care. The emphasis in that last sentence is proper care. My endocrinologist screwed up. I fixed the problem and feel great. Unfortunately crappy care happens more often than it should, because there are doctors out there who are still influenced by the WHI study, which also turned out to be bullshit that wasn't replicable.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Are you for real? All women have a huge risk of sexual assault - 50%. And the vast majority are repeat victims. So my experience is typical. It comes with the territory, and the problem isn't transition, the problem is men who think with their dicks. Nice victim-blaming you've got going there, jerk.
In a large enough population, you're going to get some people who, just at random, have a much higher number of "bad things" happening to them than others, same as if you pick random 4-digit numbers, you'll eventually come up with 4444, 1234, etc. Numbers that don't look random, but are.
Where is your proof for the claim that the public health care system (medicaid/medicare) in the US isn't working? These are people who would have NO care without it. Are you saying that people with no health care do better than people with health care? Absurd, but that's what your statement leads to.
And no, medicare/medicaid don't account for about half of US health spending. Total health spending in 2015 was 3. trillion, of which Medicare combined accounted for $1.191 trillion, out of 3.2 trillion total health care spending. That's 37%, a far cry from half. A billion here, a billion, there, and soon you're talking about real money.
Also, since you cited Israel and Greece as doing better, you proved my point. They both have universal public health care plans.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Oh, please, spare me the obvious histrionics. Medically, sexual assault is simply a risk factor after MTF gender transition. That is objectively relevant when judging the risk/benefit and cost/benefit ratios of your procedure. The choice of undergoing a major surgery followed by life-long hormonal treatment for what is essentially a mental or neurological issue does not even come close to surviving a risk/benefit analysis, let alone a cost/benefit analysis; there are many body identity disorders, and yours is the only one that is "treated" with surgery.
No, I'm sorry, things that happened to you were not "just random". You made choices and they had consequences; you can argue that you were entitled to making those choices, but that doesn't prevent the consequences or make them "just random". The way other people stay healthy, safe, and financially sound is by avoiding choices that they are technically entitled to make but that entail risk.
Well, so you looked it up and admit the basic fact then, namely that Medicare/Medicaid spend significantly more money per patient than private insurance. Great! You're now just quibbling about percentages.
That's not my main point, but that seems to be the case
Obviously, there are people who have NO care without it. There are also people who have no care BECAUSE OF it. You're cherry-picking your criteria to suit your argument. The question to ask is whether Medicare/Medicaid are more effective at delivering health care in the US than the private system, and they are not.
And I'd be overjoyed if the US federal government extended Medicare/Medicaid to all Americans while spending $2000person/year and allowing private insurance on the side. You know, like Canada, Greece, or Israel. And the nice thing about that is that it can be financed out of the existing Medicare/Medicaid budgets while even lowering taxes.
The trouble is that "universal health care" proposals in the US try to force everybody into public health plans that spend $10000/year/person and limit the ability of Americans to buy private health plans. That is, the proposals are actually nothing like what Canada, Greece, or Israel have. And ignorant Canadians like you keep advocating for that b.s.
Did you even look at the paper? It follows a cohort of more than 3500 people over decades. Stop making things up!
Geez, what possible motivation could a surgeon have to convince you of the benefits of the kind of surgery they perform? Are you really that naive?
I'm still waiting for any evidence of that. So far, all we have is "we asked around, and people who had the surgery and responded think it helped them".
You are, by your own description, a disabled, out-of-work, half blind, angry 60-something transsexual with a history of sexual abuse, PTSD, and depression living on a small pension. Do you seriously want to claim that that amounts to "fixing the problem" or "feeling great"?
And the sad thing is that most of those problems were likely avoidable if your society and your medical system hadn't let you down.
I made choices? To try to stop a murder when I was 16 rather then be killed as well? How is that a bad thing, even if it did give me PTSD? Hint - it's not - because I survived.
And no, you're the one who claims it would be $10,000/year/person.
The difference, however, between the No. 1 spender, the United States, and the No. 10 spender, Canada, is quite large. Canada spent 10.2% of its GDP on health care in 2013, which amounted to $4,351 per person, while the United States spent 16.4% of its GDP that year, amounting to $8,713 per person.
So if you just did the same things we do, which result in longer lifespans, it would be less than half what you're using as a comparison. However, because being an American is pretty much commensurate with being overweight or obese, the costs will obviously be higher. But that's your choice. You can put a tax on soft drinks, public education, etc., but you won't. Here there are government ads on TV every day encouraging people to get active. That's a lot better than ads for coke that try to intimate that if you walk for x number of minutes, you'll burn off the calories in a can of coke, which just encourages consumption (but that's what coke wants - not fit people, but people who will over-consume guilt-free).
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Here's a deconstruction of your stupid claims.
To drop from over 40% prior to surgery to 4% after is an incredible success story. Stop selectively quoting without looking at the context.
Too bad that in the US, society is letting transsexuals down by continuing to pass laws against them, as well as making it hard to obtain surgery that, as the figures show, saves lives.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Canada is 35 million people occupying the second largest country in the world, with enormous natural resources, strict immigration restrictions, few geopolitical concerns, and with little diversity. Your idea that other countries can simply choose to be like Canada is as profoundly ignorant and arrogant as royalty saying "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche".
Secondly, Americans simply don't want to be like Canadians. Forcing people to maximize their life expectancy is not what life ought to be about. If it were, why stop at national health care and commercials? Why not force everybody into institutionalized living, with controlled living conditions and food intake? No, Americans still generally believe that people should be treated like responsible adults, and despite progressive inroads, I hope that will never change. It's why I chose the US; it's pretty much the only major country that still operates that way.
The kind of broken life you have led is symptomatic of progressive societies, and it is not only unsustainable for a society as a whole, it is also deeply unfair to individuals, including yourself. Instead of ranting and raving about Trump and what Americans ought to do, you should direct your anger at Canadian society, because that is what made you what you are today. And to be clear: your life and your conduct certainly do not reflect positively on Canadian society.
You're comparing "suicidality" from a US survey with actual suicides from a Swedish study. Talk about dishonest use of statistics.
In any case, it doesn't matter anyway. "I'm suicidal unless you amputate a body part" is neither medically nor ethically a sound justification for government-financed major surgery.
It is very easy to obtain gender reassignment surgery in the US, and should continue to be so. However, it is something people should pay for themselves; government should not mandate that Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance pay for them.
Why am I even bothering wasting my time with a liar? You've become boring.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
strict immigration restrictions, few geopolitical concerns, and with little diversity.
You just can't stop lying, can you?
Statistics Canada projects that, by 2031, almost one-half of the population over the age of 15 will be foreign-born or have at least one foreign-born parent.[24] The number of visible minorities will double and make up the majority of the population of cities in Canada.
Canada admitted 35,700 Syrian refugees. That's almost 3x the US number.That's a heck of a lot better than the US's 12,486
Also, don't forget the province of Quebec - the second-largest province in the country - mostly french. Canada has 2 official languages.
Canada is more diverse than the US
A comparison of the Harvard and Goren maps show that the most diverse countries in the world are found in Africa. Both maps also suggest that the United States falls near the middle, while Canada and Mexico are more diverse than the US.
It's why I chose the US; it's pretty much the only major country that still operates that way.
Look at your last election. The rest of the world is laughing at you. Sad little man.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
You can't stop confabulating, can you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As I was saying before: I want to thank you for your brutal honesty about your life and the kind of support and guidance Canadian society has given you. You certainly confirmed again my impressions of Canada. I hope and trust my fellow Americans will draw the right conclusions from your example and from your conduct.