Eve Rickert (she/her)
banner
everickert.bsky.social
Eve Rickert (she/her)
@everickert.bsky.social
810 followers 1.2K following 600 posts
Founder and mastermind, Talk Science to Me. Founder and publisher, Thornapple Press. Author, More Than Two. Dancer, climber, adventurer, cat servant. Lekwungen and W̱SÁNEĆ territory. Book inquiries to [email protected]. Offline until September.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
This was the KB thing. I had this up on TT and YT for a couple of days then made them private.

youtu.be/PInmDoZqm3c?...
No it's fine. There's no details, and I might still need help.
IDK why, but this and the Kat Blaque thing have been the most intensely triggering things to have happened to me in the last year. I think it has something to do with agency? A feeling like others are flexing their power to keep me from moving forward?
I appreciate the support and concern. The whole thing is kind of crazy-making.
Saw your FB post but can't seem to contact you there. Just so you know, I took down my thread here because I was worried about it somehow I flaming the situation more. GR support says they are "investigating the situation." IDK why it needs an investigation, but hopefully something good will result.
Mostly just sharing because this image made me giggle at a time that I really needed it.
And from image events, we get POLYSEMIC images that carry multiple forms of ideology into the present. Here, we have the convergence of Shepard Fairey's iconic HOPE poster for the Obama campaign with the frog icon from #NoKings. The is how you visually dismantle fascist iconography.
Reposted by Eve Rickert (she/her)
In social movement studies, we talk about how marches and protests expand the threshold of acceptable risk so that people take more and bigger social risks IN PUBLIC, EN MASSE. This is extremely important for the bourgeois white folks holding signs and building social rapport.
Not a shitpost: #NoKings is feel-good performative activism for comfortable mostly upper and upper middle class white folks and that’s good, actually. Millions of people in the streets protesting a fascist regime is good. It is good for the normie baseline to be massive displays of public dissent.
A lot of people have missed it somehow—we’d appreciate help getting the word out!
Thanks. It's not GR as a whole I don't think. I did get a helpful responsible from their support team. They corrected the title. But he immediately reverted their edit.
I did point out to him that he was being creepy and inappropriate, and he called me delusional and said I couldn't control who replied to me.
Reposted by Eve Rickert (she/her)
Mathematical text analysis confirms what the humans knew: we wrote a whole new book! 😁📚😁 Check out @everickert.bsky.social's thread if you're curious about how different More Than Two, Second Edition is from its predecessor. #morethantwobook #morethantwo
Today I asked ChatGPT to compare the PDFs of More Than Two (2014) and More Than Two, Second Edition (2024) to see how much of the text was actually changed, and whether the answer lined up with my and @andreazanin.bsky.social’s off-the-cuff estimate of ~95%.

#morethantwobook #morethantwo
Reposted by Eve Rickert (she/her)
“People [in tech jobs] worry that not being seen as uncritical AI cheerleaders will be a career-limiting move…for those who aren't insiders in the tech industry, it's vital that you understand that you've been presented with an extremely distorted view about what tech workers really think about AI”
Okay, for the folks who asked: here's the majority AI view, writing up the reasonable, thoughtful view on AI that the vast majority of people in tech hold, that gets overshadowed by the bluster and hype of the tycoons trying to shill their nonsense. anildash.com/2025/10/17/t... Please share!
The Majority AI View - Anil Dash
A blog about making culture. Since 1999.
anildash.com
I would love it if someday a human would do a similar analysis, but I expect that'll be awhile.
It produced similar tables for the chapters on rules & agreements and hierarchy and primary/secondary polyamory, but the summaries were most useful.
Anyway, once we course corrected (I scolded it a bit and it promised not to make up any more stuff), it produced some interesting tables comparing concepts for a few key chapters.

Here's the one for the two chapters on communication.
(Also, since when does ChatGPT care about copyright?)
It created tables of "quotes" from the two works that looked just a little off. After I looked for and didn't find a couple of them in the PDFs, I asked ChatGPT what was up, and it admitted it had been paraphrasing.

Oh those quotation marks? That just meant it was copying the *style*. Oops!
It then asked if I wanted it to do a side-by-side comparison with a couple of chapters, and I said sure, because I was curious.

That's where things started to get kinda weird, ChatGPT style.
The conclusion too is pretty much what we've been saying all along: The echo of the old book is there, but the new book is...new.
But since this is ChatGPT, it didn't stop there, but went deeper into the specific thematic differences in the two works.
The summary was super validating of what we've been saying for the last year: "while the conceptual backbone of the 2014 edition remains recognizable, the language and ethical orientation of the 2024 edition represent a near-complete rearticulation."
Then it did a semantic analysis of overlapping ideas, finding a similarly of around 50%. Which isn't too surprising given that they're both big manuals on nonmonogamy and will have to cover a lot of the same topics.

I kinda love the specific mention of "post-#metoo awareness."