(The Center Square) – Whether a county can have more control over renewable energy projects like wind farms is under consideration by Illinois lawmakers in the final hours of lame-duck session.

An alliance of top automakers urged President Joe Biden to reconsider rules that would prop up electric vehicles at the expense of gas-powered ones.

A tech conference meant to be the largest gathering of female technologists faced backlash when biological men identifying as "nonbinary" were seen attending the event.

In between playing defense and scheming to win back Seattle’s voters over the next few election cycles, we should carve out some time for self-reflection. It’s tempting to think of the present moment as a backlash against progress, a temporary deviation in the arc of the moral universe—or perhaps, for the pessimist, to doubt the notion of progress altogether. But was this reaction really inevitable? by Katie Wilson

It’s a trying time for Seattle’s left.

The city’s new council members are rounding the curve on their first year in office, and I don’t know about you, but I’m wishing it was time to pass the baton. It’s depressing enough that City Hall is no longer a laboratory for progressive policy innovation. But it’s the Bad Idea Whac-A-Mole that’s truly exhausting: rolling back minimum wages and renter protections; defunding community-driven development; reinstating so-called SOAP and SODA zones; turning our big business tax into a slush fund. The left is having to fight like hell just to defend the achievements of the past decade.

In between playing defense and scheming to win back Seattle’s voters over the next few election cycles, we should carve out some time for self-reflection. It’s tempting to think of the present moment as a backlash against progress, a temporary deviation in the arc of the moral universe—or perhaps, for the pessimist, to doubt the notion of progress altogether. But was this reaction really inevitable? Can we draw any lessons from it? What should the left do differently in the future to regain influence and maintain it?

Critics of progressive-left political culture, as it’s developed over the past dozen or so years, often emphasize its supposed impotence: its penchant for loudness on social media, insistence on ideological purity, and zeal for “canceling” individuals instead of changing systems. Its adherents operate mainly in the symbolic realm and can’t break out of their echo chamber long enough to affect the real world.

Whatever the merits of this kind of critique, it doesn’t fully capture what’s happened in Seattle. Precisely what characterizes our city (and just a handful of others) is that the progressive left has been effective, relatively speaking, at winning real things. But our success is not due to some special organizing prowess or because we’ve avoided the pitfalls of the wider culture. It has more to do with our city’s demographic peculiarities.

Over the past several decades, progressive politics have come to correlate ever more strongly with educational attainment, while “dealigning” from markers of working class status. The gradual replacement of old Seattle’s blue collar workforce, displaced by rising housing costs and the dwindling of maritime and industrial jobs, with the younger, more affluent tech worker set hasn’t made Seattle any less blue; perhaps the opposite. Add to that some political self-selection among new arrivals, and the average normie non-activist voter just happens to be a flaming lib. On top of all that, union density in Washington state is among the highest in the country, and when Seattle’s labor unions decide to throw their weight around in local elections, left-leaning candidates tend to get a leg up.

With these advantages, Seattle’s left hasn’t had to be extraordinarily smart or strategic to win a modicum of political power. And a movement with power faces different problems than a movement in opposition. From the outside, it’s easy to lambaste the status quo and its obvious failings. But actually governing is more complicated. It means passing policies, implementing them, defending their results. It also means being vulnerable to blame for whatever’s going wrong in the city, whether or not it’s your fault or within your power to fix.

Of course, even at its strongest, Seattle’s progressive left held only partial power—through a city council majority that was often undermined by more centrist mayors. In such circumstances, governing also means having to decide when to remain oppositional, and when to compromise and win what you can. Either way, you have to tell a good story, explaining what you’ve done and why you couldn’t do more, to avoid being seen as ineffective.

All this means that the progressive predisposition of Seattle’s electorate is a trap, as well as an advantage. If it were harder to get lefties into office, that might force us to be more strategic about what they should do when they get there—and to build the kind of movement that can support them when the going gets rough.

Winning power is one thing, holding it is another.

Over the last two election cycles, the left lost it. The backlash began in 2021 with the victories of Mayor Bruce Harrell, Councilmember Sara Nelson, and City Attorney Ann Davison. Last fall finished the job, ushering in the most conservative city council Seattle has seen in a long time.

In my new column for The Stranger, I plan to look both backward and forward. I’ll dig through the past ten-plus years in search of lessons that can help Seattle’s left into the future. I write as someone who’s been involved in many—though by no means all—of the progressive policy battles of this period, primarily through my work with the Transit Riders Union. But I’m speaking for myself, not for any organization, and I don’t expect that all my opinions will be popular. There is too much groupthink on the left; so let’s disagree!

The backlash elections of 2021 and 2023 centered most obviously around the issues of homelessness, policing, and public safety. I will start the journey there, looking critically at the question of what our goals should be and how we frame and explain these goals.

These are themes we share with other progressive big cities, but our politics have a unique side, too. No look back at the past decade of Seattle’s left can bypass an assessment of Kshama Sawant’s tenure on the council, and the influence of her former organization, Socialist Alternative.

And these discussions will raise larger questions about progressive-left organizing. Who is “the left,” anyway, and does “progressive” mean anything anymore, if it ever did? Whom are we trying to organize and how? Toward what ends?

The left is not a monolith. In practice, Seattle’s left today is an uneasy alliance of labor unions, community organizations from the long-established to the ad-hoc, issue-based advocacy groups, service-focused nonprofits, parties and other overtly political formations, and freelance activists, coalescing imperfectly and temporarily around specific campaigns or policy goals. Between and also within these entities there exists a multiplicity of worldviews, theories of social change, and visions of a future, better social order.

When someone on the left (like me) talks about what “we” should be doing, only in the most abstract sense are they speaking to and about this whole constellation of actors. But throughout these institutions and broader left milieu there are individuals who, to a greater or lesser extent, can choose to do things differently, or to do something new.

There is a gleam of light on the horizon. In next Tuesday’s special election for citywide council position 8, the left looks poised to claw back a seat. Next year will bring a larger opportunity, with the mayor and city attorney up for re-election as well as the two citywide council positions. But progressives won’t have a chance at a reliable governing majority until 2027.

So let’s make sure that when we win that majority, we’re prepared to hold onto it. It’s easy to bemoan the hypocrisy of Seattle liberals, the reactionary and ungenerous impulses too often hiding behind those “in this house we believe” yard signs. I’ve done that myself. But if the left can’t maintain the edge in a city where your average voter is at pains to prove his progressive bona fides, what chance do we have at power anywhere?

The right has been spreading outrageous lies, claiming that kids are going to school as one gender and coming home as another after "impromptu surgeries." The writer points out how absurd this idea is: surgeries, especially gender-affirming ones, aren’t done in schools, don’t happen on a whim, and certainly aren’t performed on minors without extensive parental involvement. It’s a scare tactic with no basis in reality. by Vivian McCall

Lately, Donald Trump has been spreading a ridiculous lie that kids are going to school one gender and arriving home another.

I wanted to explain how a person doesn’t have to know anything about transgender people, schools, or medicine to know this isn’t true. A little boy isn’t going to come skipping home from school a little girl after an impromptu genital gender-affirmation surgery because gender-affirmation surgeries are not impromptu, are rarely performed on minors, and are never performed on minors without parental consent. They’re not performed in schools at all because schools don’t have operating rooms. Even if there was enough time in a school day to rush a kid to the hospital, this is not a check-up. Nobody waltzes out of the hospital after a major surgery. Think for one second and it makes no fucking sense.

Then I heard Trump say that the Democrats want gender surgeries for “almost everyone in the world” because they’re evil. Suddenly, it felt kind of futile and stupid to write a sarcastic, reasonable explanation of the facts because the floor for what Trump is willing to say about transgender people is a chasm. 

By his telling, the people cheer him on when he mentions “transgender” at his rallies, and he’ll do anything for the applause. This fervor is also why the hundreds of failed anti-trans bills—or polling that shows Americans by and large don’t really give a shit about trans issues and would rather talk about the economy—won’t dissuade Republicans from launching more anti-trans campaigns and introducing hundreds more bills restricting LGBTQ civil rights. During the World Series, viewers were subjected to anti-trans and anti-abortion ads so graphic that networks issued content warnings explaining that legally they have to air anything a qualified political candidate pays for.

We’re not having a rational conversation about trans issues in this country, we’re watching a panic attack about the threat trans people supposedly pose to the concept of gender and the nuclear family.

My better angels want me to tell conservatives about the trans people who want children with their spouses, or still love the ones they had before coming out. But if someone believes Big Gender is an evil enterprise, it’ll take someone they love coming out for them to recognize the groomer talk as the manipulative fiction it is. It will always be easier to hate some blue-haired apparition lurking in the shadows of your mind than your childhood buddy Jim when she tells you to call her Linda.

For obvious reasons, the possibility of a Trump victory is freaking out people in the queer community, even here in Washington, with our protective laws and Democrat-dominated Legislature. Because what Trump says and does are often different things, they’re unsure of the implications for their health care, their families, their marriages, and their futures. 

What We Can and Should Worry About at the Federal Level

In 2023, Penny Nance, CEO of the Christian nonprofit Concerned Women for America, asked Donald Trump to sign a pledge that if he won in 2024, he’d direct all federal agencies to uphold that a person’s “gender identity” doesn’t overrule their “sex.” Pledge or no pledge, nothing Trump did as president or has said during this campaign indicates he wouldn’t.

While in power, Trump appointed a slate of anti-LGBTQ judges. He banned transgender people from serving in the military and weakened their already tenuous access to gender-affirming care. How much farther he could go is another question. The man’s mind is an enigma. No matter who wins, the courts will remain a chaotic x-factor for us all.

By the time Trump took office in 2017, federal courts had recognized existing civil rights laws banning sex-discrimination protected gay and trans people, reasoning that anti-LGBTQ discrimination was, at its core, a reaction to people deviating from the norms of their sex. But the words “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” are not in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or Title IX, a 1972 law prohibiting sex discrimination in education, or Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (the ACA, also known as Obamacare) outlining groups protected from discrimination.

Those rights exist, but they’re not codified. Their existence depends on a broader legal interpretation of what sex discrimination even means. 

Trump’s administration rejected that interpretation. It rolled back Obama-era non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people and plotted to erase the word “sex” from federal civil rights laws. In 2019, the House passed the Equality Act, a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “ “gender identity” to the Civil Rights Act, on a bi-partisan vote, but the Senate didn’t take up the bill after Trump said he wouldn’t sign it. The bill passed the House again with only three Republican supporters, but did not survive a Senate filibuster. 

Then at the end of Trump’s presidency, the conservative US Supreme Court delivered a stunning 6-3 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County that found Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protected gay and trans people from employment discrimination. As Trump’s handpicked appointee Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion, “it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” Trump, whose White House filed two briefs urging the court to rule the other way, admitted to reporters it was a “very powerful decision, actually.” Not that its “power” changed his thinking. 

Yipee! All solved, right? Gay people have rights forever? Gorsuch is competing in International Mr. Leather next year and drinking with us at the Stonewall Inn? Right? 

Not quite. 

Bostock laid an important legal precedent and textualist argument that’s been cited in hundreds of sex-discrimination cases around the country.  The ruling prompted President Joe Biden to issue an executive order on his first day in office that directed all federal agencies to consider policies banning sex discrimination to apply to gay and trans people. It remains at the core of its interpretations of Title IX, the Violence Against Women Act, the ACA and the federal Fair Housing Act.

But Bostock did not end the fight, and its narrow scope leaves some rights potentially vulnerable should Trump take control. Say he’s elected and makes good on his pledge to Nance. The Supreme Court was clear on workplace protections, but Trump’s lackeys could say their ruling doesn’t apply to housing, healthcare, access to public accommodations, and education.

Mirroring Biden’s executive order to federal agencies, Trump said he’d reverse Title IX protections for trans students on day one of his presidency. He’s also vowed to ban gender-affirming care for minors, which he’s called child mutilation, and cut federal funding for schools that push “gender ideology.” His running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, introduced five anti-trans bills between 2023 and 2024, which included criminalizing healthcare for trans kids. Saving his most deranged takes for the race’s photo finish, Vance appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast and suggested middle- and upper-class white kids become trans to get into good schools, so they can, I guess, piss their pants in the lecture hall if a state revokes their bathroom access. As CNN pointed out, trans kids are actually a lot less likely to get into good schools because all the bullying, harassment, and dark thoughts tend to bring down the ol’ grade point average.

Harris, Harris, Harris, Harris, Harris. In the 2019 primary, she said she supported gender-affirming surgeries for trans migrants in custody. She’s not special for that–federal law requires the government to provide necessary medical care to inmates, and documents show Trump’s Federal Bureau of Prisons acknowledged that law–but people have made a lot of her apparent lack of support this cycle. When asked about transgender rights, Harris’s canned answer is that she’ll “follow the law.” Without a crystal ball or Ouija board handy, I’d hazard to guess she’d likely follow in Biden’s footsteps and his “follow the law” line is a dodge —perhaps part of her plan to nab all the Republican-leaning voters who can’t stand Trump but may not get trans issues. After all, trans issues have been a fruitful wedge issue precisely because people don’t understand them – and people fear what they don’t understand.

That said, laws are not virtues, and trans people are pissed about her lack of commitment. They’re scared because they’ve been pilloried in this election, and following the law in certain states means they don’t have civil rights. Plenty have fled those laws. Her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has one of the best records on gay and trans rights of any Democratic governor, from his time as a football coach sponsoring a Gay-Straight Alliance in a small town to signing an executive order to make Minnesota a “trans refugee state.” I don’t trust politicians as a rule, but Walz has been an ally much longer than it’s been cool or even acceptable.

Now for the part that made me go uh-oh out loud.

No matter who wins, these anti-discrimination protections are up against federal courts stacked with conservative appointees, and conservative think tanks have the money, the time, and the zealous devotion to launch sophisticated attacks to invalidate LGBTQ rights and restrict the legal definition of sex in perpetuity.

Jaelynn Scott, Executive Director of the Lavender Rights Project, a Seattle-based LGBTQ legal advocacy organization, is convinced the broad interpretation of Title VII will face continual legal challenges until lawmakers amend the Civil Rights Act to include “gender identity” or pass the Equality Act.

Federal judges have already blocked Biden’s Bostock-backed interpretations of Title XI and the ACA’s non-discrimination protections. The same Supreme Court justices who ruled in favor of Bostock also blocked the administration's Title IX rules. The court’s recent decision on Chevron Deference compounds the problem. It not only weakened the power of federal agencies to enact new rules that comply with often vague laws from Congress, but it also made challenging federal regulations much easier and shows we can’t count on the Justices to adhere to binding legal precedent, which sucks because this all may come down to if or when the Supreme Court sets limits on Bostock. 

We know it will soon decide if laws restricting gender-affirming care violate the US Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. On December 4, the Court will hear US v. Skrmetti, a challenge to Tennessee’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors.

The case is important because it could determine what level of protection trans people have under the Equal Protection Clause. Elana Redfield, Federal Policy Director at the Williams Institute, a LGBTQ public-policy research center at the University of California, Los Angeles, says the issue at the heart of this case is whether it is unlawful for the state to ban these treatments in the way that it did. 

Recent cases show the state might be able to legally prove no sex discrimination took place. The first is Dobbs, the case that struck down abortion. In the Dobbs decision, the court cited an old case called Geduldig v. Aiello, which found a state could legally deny insurance coverage for medical complications during pregnancy, even though it would have almost entirely burdened cis women, to say states could prohibit abortion. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals applied Geduldig to Adams, a case that upheld a state’s right to enact trans bathroom bans. In Skrmetti, The Sixth Court of Appeals again applied the same exact legal reasoning to gender-affirming care. It ruled the Bostock decision applied only to workplace discrimination and lawmakers had the right to regulate medical procedures as long as they did so without discriminatory intent. 

“I know, it's pretty in the weeds, but it is also important,” Redfield said in an email. “In part because it provides a pathway for courts to avoid finding sex discrimination, and in part because they are citing back to cases decided before “intermediate scrutiny” for sex discrimination was even established.”

It’s not all bad news. This April, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed lower court decisions that North Carolina’s and West Virginia's bans on gender-affirming care were unconstitutional. 

Trump’s focus on trans people has obscured his position on gay rights, which enjoy broader support from the American electorate than trans rights.

But would a party more aligned with the religious and extreme right than ever abandon the positions they’ve consolidated power over for decades, just like that? The supposedly “softer” Republican platform that claims the party will leave abortion to the states has not convinced millions of women across the country. Omitting a direct reference to same-sex marriage in that same platform, while still invoking its “sanctity,” shouldn’t convince gays, either. 

A second Trump administration would be filled with pre-vetted loyalists. The aides, staff, bureaucracy, and institutions that inhibited his most destructive impulses during his first turn have been foxed out of the henhouse. If Trump follows the plan outlined in Project 2025, he’ll reconstitute the administrative state as a faithful engine of Trumpism. If decisions from the Washington Post’s and Los Angeles Times’s billionaire owners are any indication, institutions may be folding in advance. Trump is promising to throw his political enemies in jail, for God’s sake. When have gay people ever emerged from a regime like that unscathed?

Um, What About Washington?

Even if everything goes to hell and Trump or the courts change how the government interprets sex-based anti-discrimination protections, Washington State will probably remain a good place to be gay and trans, legally speaking. Though there’s always uncertainty in the brackish waters between federal and state law, we're pretty Trump-proofed.

The Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) broadly guards against anti-gay and anti-trans discrimination in housing, places of public accommodation, employment, credit transactions, healthcare, and other areas. 

Meaning you should be able to sign a new lease, take out a massive home loan, celebrate with fine dining and heavy drinking, stumbling and falling on your way out the door, breaking your arm, calling an ambulance, arriving at the hospital, and having a qualified medical professional examine you without anyone throwing your gay or trans ass into the street.

The WLAD also guarantees access to gender-affirming care and requires insurers to cover it, a protection the Gender Affirming Treatment Act (GATA) strengthened in 2022.

The state also allows those born here to change the gender marker on their birth certificate from M to F, F to M, or from either to X. In 2023, Governor Jay Inslee signed laws that sealed name changes for transgender people and protected trans runaways in the shelter system. He also signed a shield law that protects people who seek gender-affirming care and abortions in Washington from the authorities in states that have banned or criminalized their healthcare.

Even if the Supreme Court struck down Obergefell v. Hodges, gay marriage would remain legal in Washington, save the Supreme Court losing its mind and allowing for a federal prohibition on same-sex unions, another can of worms that would be litigated to hell along the lines of states rights. Gay couples would still be able to adopt, too. Lesbian couples could count on the law to protect access and insurance coverage for fertility treatments.

Adrien Leavitt, a staff attorney with the ACLU of Washington, says in many regards our state constitution is also more protective than the US constitution, that we have a strong State Supreme Court, and that our lawmakers have shown an ongoing commitment to upholding and strengthening protections for LGBTQ people.

Our Democratic lawmakers did let the right take one victory on LGBTQ issues this year, however, when it passed Let’s Go Washington’s legally ambiguous, but dog-whistle-y Parents Bill of Rights ballot initiative I-2081.

Concerned the law may allow parents to access their child’s counseling records, the ACLU of Washington, QLaw and Legal Voice filed suit. A King County Superior Court Judge later blocked that provision. But passing the law might have been a political calculation in Olympia. HadDemocrats let it go to voters, and it passed, the Legislature couldn’t amend it next session.

We still don’t have all the answers. Rebekah Gardea, QLaw’s director of community advocacy and outreach, raised I-2081 as an example in a pattern of attacks on LGBTQ rights across the country able to infiltrate even a progressive state like Washington. Even if advocacy groups can be fairly confident laws banning gender-affirming care would die in committee here in Washington, the right can always introduce an initiative if there’s the money and motivation to do so. In the event of a second Trump presidency, Gardea says her organization is concerned about how our shield law would hold against a federal investigation, or what potential data privacy gaps the state may have. It’s a question the Legislature may have to answer next session.

“There’s a lot of unknowns that we’re still looking into,” she said. “We’re trying to figure out how we strengthen those protections as soon as possible so there’s really no room for interpretation.”

Should the storm come, the best thing Washington could do is adopt the position that it will live up to its progressive values by vigorously defending them against outside actors, including a federal government that imposed restrictions on LGBTQ rights. Bob Ferguson, the Attorney General and Democratic frontrunner for the governor’s race, said in a statement he’d be ready on “day one” to combat a Trump presidency.

That’s all well and good for us, but sanctuary state thinking is a trap. Your civil rights are tenuous if they can disappear at the state line.  

These progressive state laws do not regulate hate and intimidation, and if the federal government goes screwball, there’s no telling how that would change the social dynamics in this country. They’ve already changed so much in a short period of time.

Eight years ago in 2016, lawmakers nationwide had only introduced 55 anti-trans bills nationwide. That same year, North Carolina's passage of a single anti-trans bathroom bill prompted the NCAA to ban college sports championships in the state, PayPal to cancel plans for a new office and Beatle Ringo Starr to cancel a massive concert. The Associated Press determined the state stood to lose $3.76 billion dollars over the bathroom policy, which is why lawmakers repealed it the next year. In the last two years, we’ve seen between 1,000 and 1,200 bills. Most fail, but plenty are passing. Where are those boycotts now? The only transgender-related social contagion in this country is ignorance. When it comes to hate, state borders are astoundingly porous.

I’m very confident Washington won’t pass a gender-affirming care ban in the next five years, or even the next 10 years. But 15? A lot can change. Fifteen years ago, Donald Trump was hosting Season 8 of The Celebrity Apprentice. 

The world changes and complacency is one way to speed up that change. There’s a snide attitude in blue states about red states, like the only reason regressive laws get passed is because all the people there are stupid and backward enough to let it happen. I hear variations of this contemptuous position in gay bars and on gay couches at parties all the time, and it totally ignores decades of disenfranchisement and manipulation that have tilted the balance of power in red states. 

So the next time you think something to the effect of, “at least I’m safe,” think about the woman going septic in the hospital parking lot, or the trans kid weighing suicide in their bedroom. If you’re not for them, you’re not for anything at all.

I asked ChatGPT: "Based on what you know about me, draw a picture of what you think my current life looks like."

Thanks, Google! Its algorithm updates continued unabated in 2014, leading to panic among some search marketers and dread among many more. Now that Google has been on a mission to reduce the visibility of low-value pages, especially those that are over-optimized for keywords, does it seem like there are hardly any optimization techniques left that […]

There is a sea full of different brands in the market but the content marketing research tells that still majority of these brands does not have a documented marketing strategy. Developing a content marketing strategy for your brand is as essential as keeping the quality of your content top-notch. A quality content is worth only […]

Here's a weblog or blog on masquerading emails. This free RSS feed could help you to identify masquerading emails that are worms, virus, scams or spams. Having an increased awareness and understanding may help to prevent your computers from being infected or being misled by some scams.

Curious to know what other shoppers have ordered? You can now see some general statistics for the top 10 most recent orders and top 10 most popular hosiery (past 7 days, 30 days, 90 days and overall).

Life-altering experiences. Can you point to a single experience in your life, as a child, which you can define as having contributed to the person you are today? (+)

In the spring of 2020, Andrea Walker Warren and her husband, Matt Warren, found themselves in Munich, contemplating moving back to the United States…

The weaponizing of words is poisoning our body politic…

Whether you agree with it or not, Spokane's rental registry is law…

In evaluating the films released thus far this year, it is hard to think of one that more closely aligns with about everything you would expect than The Lost City…

It's a sunny Monday as I drive out to Sherman, one of Lincoln County's few ghost towns…

Soccer is the world's game — the beautiful game — and here in Spokane, it's the Velocity's game…

Fear is an instinctive, innate biological response that's kept humans safe for many millennia…

When I began thinking about the relationship between neighborhoods and food in Spokane, we were still in COVID lockdown and I hadn't been out to eat in over a year…

Before we start, let's get this out of the way: No, it is not a HIPAA violation to ask someone if they've been vaccinated for COVID-19…

Fifty years ago, in 1972, Spokane was on the threshold of creating one of the most remarkable world's fairs anywhere…

As preparations begin for the 50th anniversary of EXPO '74 next year, we want to reflect on one of the greatest periods in our history, when the Spokane community somehow pulled together to put on a World's Fair and, at the same time, tackled some of the biggest challenges our community had ever faced…

Spokane's skyline boasts three iconic buildings…

My first 18 years saw a lot of pets — a cat, a dog, two rabbits, some fish, a frog and a snake…

Imagine this: You're voting on a matter of national significance, you get to the front of the line, and the poll worker asks, "What state are you from?"…

Wylie Hunter refuses to give up…

Folk punk hits different in the UK…

Sometimes it can be tough when you get the musical munchies yet struggle to figure out what exactly fits your sonic taste in the moment…

I'm watching a pale, androgynous figure gyrate on an oversized, grainy tube TV in 1998…

marusin posted a photo:

via Instagram ift.tt/2b6gvKI

marusin posted a photo:

via Instagram ift.tt/2hkUMfs

The former daytime talk show host thanks the 'Charlie's Angels' actress for pioneering green-screen chat technology as she uses the effect for her own 'Oprah Conversations' show.

Meanwhile, Byron locals are not happy with the docusoap as they reportedly paddle out into the ocean to protest the show in addition to launching a petition against the new project.

The 'Hot Girl Summer' hitmaker has been signed on to front 'Off Thee Leash With Megan Thee Stallion', which is produced by Will Smith's Westbrook Media company.

The 'Hot Girl Summer' hitmaker has been signed on to front 'Off Thee Leash With Megan Thee Stallion', which is produced by Will Smith's Westbrook Media company.

In this episode, Ida introduces us to Pride Counseling, an iOS app that provides access to the company's online therapy platform specifically designed for the LGBTQ+ community. She discusses the app's features, such as live chat and video calls with licensed professionals who specialize in LGBTQ+ issues. Ida explains how Pride Counseling provides personalized therapy that is convenient and discreet.

In this episode, Thomas Domville introduces and demonstrates the official ChatGPT iOS app. Thomas walks through the app's interface, demonstrates some examples of how ChatGPT can be utilized, and shares tips to get the best results.

Note that this app is currently only available in the United States.

In this episode, Thomas Domville introduces and demonstrates Microsoft's Bing: Chat with AI & GPT-4 iOS app. Thomas walks through the app's interface, demonstrates some examples of how Bing can be utilized, and shares tips to get the best results.

Get ready to test your vocabulary and spelling skills with Zanagrams, the addictive iOS game that's perfect for word puzzle enthusiasts of all ages. In this episode Thomas Domville will demonstrate Zanagrams: Word Puzzles with a Twist. Zanagrams is a fast-paced word game that challenges players to identify and unscramble hidden words within a grid of letters. With its simple rules but increasing difficulty, Zanagrams is easy to pick up but hard to put down. Whether you're a seasoned word game player or just a casual puzzle fan, Zanagrams is sure to provide hours of fun and entertainment.

Download Zanagrams for free on the App Store:
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/zanagrams/id6444921132

In this episode, Thomas Domville gives us an overview of new accessibility features for blind, DeafBlind, and visually impaired users in iOS 18. Topics covered include:

• Live Recognition Comes to the Rotor
• Voices Rotor
• Improvements to Audio Ducking
• VoiceOver Tutorial
• VoiceOver Startup Haptic Feedback
• Delay Before Selection
• New languages for Lithuanian and Kazak
• Using Personal Voice with VoiceOver
• Equalizer and Other New Customization Options for VoiceOver Voices
• Voice Presets for Siri Voices
• A New VoiceOver Gesture for Accessing Siri Text Input
• Braille Screen Input Improvements
• Motion Queues
• New Sound Actions
• Assistive Touch Improvements
• Eye Tracking
• New Background Sounds and Controls
• Music Haptics
• Live Speech Improvements
• Voice Control Improvements
• Vocal Shortcuts
• Hover Typing
• Car Play Improvements: Voice Control, Color Filters, and Sound Recognition
• Magnifier Improvements: Assign Action Button to Magnifier Mode and New Reader Mode
• Improvements to Accessing Reader Mode in Safari

Transcript

Disclaimer: This transcript is generated by AIKO, an automated transcription service. It is not edited or formatted, and it may not accurately capture the speakers’ names, voices, or content.

An Apple Vis Original What's new in iOS 18 for accessibility?

Hello and welcome.

My name is Thomas Donville, also known as Anonymous, as like every year, a new iOS comes in play and Apple brings out new features for us to enjoy.

So with no exception, this year we got a slew of new features for voiceover users, braille users, and other accessibility features that you might find of interest.

There's a lot in here to pack, so let's go ahead and jump right into it and you can hear for yourself what is new in iOS 18 for accessibility.

Live recognition is now an option within your rotor if you include it.

To include it, you just go to your accessibility and head over to rotors and include the live recognition.

This allows you to access live recognition quickly and easily by simply going to your rotor.

Once enabled, we'll just head over to live recognition within our rotor, where you are able to select one or more of the various detections you would like to be enabled.

As you swipe down or up within the rotor, you get the various detection.

To enable a particular detection, just simply do one finger double tap, double tap again and that'll disable it.

If you dismiss the rotor and keep the detection on, it will now live in with your dynamic island towards the top of your device or you can dismiss it from there as well.

Apple has now enhanced the voice over voice option within rotors, which used to be called language.

This rotor allows you to access the various voices that you have defined within speech under accessibility, but that itself has completely been revamped, which you can find within the voice over in the accessibility.

Double tap on this now.

You now have two section in here, first is your primary voice, which can be in any language, doesn't have to be necessarily English and they can…

Richard Lutz looks back in langour at the past seven days

Richard Lutz checks out how he wandered through another week.

Richard Lutz rummages through the vestiges of the last week

Richard Lutz finds the toughest TV film of the week on his 90" flatscreen.

Richard Lutz says goodbye to a friend.

Sheilagh Matheson works in an African community so poor it can’t afford mirrors.

The music matches the weather this week.

Debutants and regulars are in town this week.

Richard Lutz plunders his archive to remember what happened last week.....