A subreddit has gained attention on social media after one of the moderators 'warned' a commenter for "overrating" a woman's looks. The subreddit called "True Rate Me" uses a strict numerical system to rate the physical appearance of users who upload selfies onto the website. The subreddit contains a guide for rating women and men at the top of its page and is strict when it comes to enforcing correct ratings. A tweet, originally posted by the account @kirbylarp, contained a screenshot from the subreddit showing a user receiving a "warning" for "overrating" a woman who uploaded her photo to the subreddit. The tweet has since been deleted at the request of the woman in the photo. After the subreddit went viral, users wanted to gain a better insight into how it operates, with many shocked and even "disgusted", whilst some tried to defend the page. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter One Reddit user uploaded five photos of herself, saying: "Just curious... 21F" (21, female). Her post had 1.8k comments, and it seemed that any user who rated her seven or above was smacked with a "warning" for giving her too high a rating. One person rated her a seven. "I'd consider going higher, too, if it weren't for mods giving people warnings for anything above 7. According to this sub’s guide, I think you’re prettier than most of the 7’s there, and reading through comments, it doesn’t look like I’m the only one who believes that. I think it’s the mods being subjective with this one…" Another rated her a 6.2. "If you're really only 21, you need to start using sunscreen and daily moisturiser now," one brutal comment read. "Drink lots of water and stop smoking if you do. You're getting away with it, but in a few years, your skin is going to look so wrinkled/old." "5.8 attractive and above average," a third added. "Flaws include lips and skin (possible symmetry issues too). Facial harmony is well above average. The lower third bone structure and profile view are unusually good. Beautiful overall." According to the guide attached to the subreddit, a seven is in the top 2.5%. Actresses Tara Shahidi, Shay Mitchell, and Elizabeth Lail are all considered 7s. Model Emily Ratajkowski is considered a 7.5. "Somewhat uncommon and the most attractive women seen on a day-to-day basis," states the guide. "These women stand out from the crowd and may be able to model or be successful as an 'Instagram model' or influencer." It goes on to describe 7's as having "feminine and attractive" facial features but may possess flaws such as "bulbous nasal tip, slight asymmetry, long mid-face." Men also post photos of themselves for ratings, with a "male 7" being similar to that of a "female 7", but their flaws are considered to be "crooked nose, slight asymmetry, long mid-face, Negative Canthal tilt." Penn Badgley, Tony Chung, and Keith Powers were among those rated a seven. When those outside the subreddit discovered True Rate Me, many took to Twitter to express their shock at some of the comments posted: One user tried to explain that people on the subreddit aren't giving their personal opinions (or at least aren't supposed to) and that all users have to follow the guide. Others lauded those who upload their photos as "brave" people, whilst another user joked they were going to give all women a rating of 10: The subreddit states that it "aims to provide accurate and objective ratings, by implementing standards that give raters a common ground." They also disagrees with the phrase "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", they argue "beauty is more objective than subjective. Why do you think there is always general agreement on which celebrities are attractive and which are not?" In bold at the bottom of the subreddit's wiki page reads: "In order to promote accuracy, rating someone without referencing the scale (UNREALISTIC/SUGARCOATED ratings) may result in a warning and/or immediate ban." Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

European Union regulators have hit Google with fresh antitrust charges, saying the only way to satisfy competition concerns about its lucrative digital ad business is by selling off parts of the tech giant’s main moneymaker

Check out all the details surrounding the Fortnite x Futurama collaboration, including skins and in-game updates, coming on July 26.

OpenAI is on track for $1 billion of annual revenue as businesses adopt the technology behind ChatGPT, the

U.S. Steel rejects an unsolicited buyout offer from rival Cleveland-Cliffs, Tesla again cuts prices in China, and AMC stock tumbles after a court approves the movie-theater chain's revised stock-conversion plan.

Twitter boss Elon Musk, who has often touted himself as a champion of free speech, said he had no "actual choice" when accused of caving in to censorship demands made by authoritarian governments. Since the billionaire's takeover in October last year, Twitter has approved 83 per cent more censorship requests from governments such as Turkey and India, El Pais reported. The company reportedly received 971 requests from governments, fully acceding to 808 of them and partially acceding to 154. The year prior to Mr Musk taking control, Twitter agreed to 50 per cent of such requests, which was in line with the compliance rate indicated in the company’s last transparency report. The report, shared by Bloomberg columnist Matthew Yglesias, evoked an angry reaction from Mr Musk. Mr Yglesias tweeted the report with the caption "I’m a free speech absolutist", quoting the Twitter boss. The world's second-richest person shot back, writing: "You're such a numbskull. Please point out where we had an actual choice and we will reverse it." The columnist responded: "Look, I’m not the one who bought Twitter amidst a blaze of proclamations about free speech principles. "Obviously you’re within your rights to run your business however you want." Mr Musk has repeatedly reiterated his backing for free speech both before and since the $44bn acquisition of Twitter. The “absolutist” quote refers to a tweet in March 2022 in the wake of Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. "Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint," Mr Musk tweeted. "Sorry to be a free speech absolutist." Yet Twitter has been accused of helping incumbent Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan stifle criticism by blocking several accounts in the two days before the country’s hotly contested general election. “In response to legal process and to ensure Twitter remains available to the people of Turkey, we have taken action to restrict access to some content in Turkey today,” Twitter’s global government affairs announced, without explaining which tweets would be blocked. Following severe criticism, Mr Musk alleged Twitter has “pushed harder for free speech than any other internet company, including Wokipedia”. Earlier this year in India, Twitter complied after Narendra Modi’s government used emergency powers to ban content related to a BBC documentary on social media. The two-part documentary included a previously unpublished report from the UK Foreign Office that held Mr Modi “directly responsible” for the “climate of impunity” that enabled communal violence in Gujarat state. The riots in February 2002 killed over 1,000 people – most of them Muslims – while Mr Modi was chief minister of the state. Justifying the consent Mr Musk said: "The rules in India for what can appear on social media are quite strict, and we can’t go beyond the laws of a country." He said doing so would put his staff at risk. “If we have a choice of either our people going to prison or us complying with the laws, we will comply with the laws.” Read More Elon Musk tweets quote by neo-Nazi wrongly attributed to Voltaire Erdogan declared winner of Turkey presidential run-off – extending his 20 years in power India uses emergency powers to ban anyone from sharing clips of BBC Modi documentary Elon Musk tweets quote by neo-Nazi wrongly attributed to Voltaire Elon Musk’s Neuralink brain chip company gets FDA approval for human testing AOC jokes more people watched her gaming online than listened to DeSantis launch

President Joe Biden is set to sign an executive order aiming to bolster job opportunities for military and veteran spouses whose careers are often disrupted by their loved ones’ deployments

The newest Titanfall 3 rumor trailer is likely not backed by Respawn Entertainment and EA, debunking the global reveal date of Oct. 27.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23, 2023--

Amazon is bringing its Amazon One palm recognition system to all of its more than 500 Whole Foods stores by the end of the year.

It is possible for human beings to hear silence, according to a team of philosophers and psychologists, in a huge win for 1960s crooners Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel. In a study published on Monday by Johns Hopkins University researchers, the team decided that it’s not just sound that human hears pick up: silence is, indeed, something we can hear too. Rui Zhe Goh, a Johns Hopkins graduate student in philosophy and psychology who was the study’s lead author, wrote: "We typically think of our sense of hearing as being concerned with sounds. But silence, whatever it is, is not a sound — it's the absence of sound. Surprisingly, what our work suggests is that nothing is also something you can hear.” Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter Per the study, published in the journal PNAS, researchers had participants listen to an array of audio illusions. They also periodically substituted the noise for pure nothingness, the measure whether people’s brains would react in the same way. “Philosophers have long debated whether silence is something we can literally perceive, but there hasn’t been a scientific study aimed directly at this question,” said study co-author Chaz Firestone, an assistant professor of psychological and brain sciences and the director of the Johns Hopkins Perception & Mind Laboratory. “Our approach was to ask whether our brains treat silences the way they treat sounds.” "If you can get the same illusions with silences as you get with sounds, then that may be evidence that we literally hear silence after all." The 1,000 participants’ responses were measured across seven different tests. Across all of them, their brains reacted the same way to silence as they did to noise. “We show that silences can 'substitute' for sounds in event-based auditory illusions,” said the study. “Seven experiments introduce three 'silence illusions,' adapted from perceptual illusions previously thought to arise only with sounds.” “In all cases, silences elicited temporal distortions perfectly analogous to their sound-based counterparts, suggesting that auditory processing treats moments of silence the way it treats sounds. Silence is truly perceived, not merely inferred,” it said. “The kinds of illusions and effects that look like they are unique to the auditory processing of a sound, we also get them with silences, suggesting we really do hear absences of sound too,” added study co-author Ian Phillips, a John Hopkins philosopher and psychologist. Hello darkness my old friend… Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

TEL AVIV, Israel & NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 23, 2023--