• 0 Posts
  • 79 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle



  • The theory proposes that hunting was a major driver of human evolution and that men carried this activity out to the exclusion of women. It holds that human ancestors had a division of labor, rooted in biological differences between males and females, in which males evolved to hunt and provide and females tended to children and domestic duties. It assumes that males are physically superior to females and that pregnancy and child-rearing reduce or eliminate a female’s ability to hunt.

    Oh boy, what a load of bullshit to start an article that may very well have a solid point. I lost all interest in reading at this paragraph.

    “It holds” - as if there was only one theory - and everyone who believes that men were mostly hunters and women mostly gatherers would be guilty of the assumptions mentioned thereafter.

    I, for one, only ever heard that due to men mostly hunting (because women were busy with children), men evolved to have a better perception of moving images e.g. small movements of prey in hiding, and women evolved to have a better perception of details of inanimate objects (e.g. finding things to forage). And that explanation - while not necessarily correct - made sense, and is in no way the sexist bullshit that the article insinuates.

    The author of that article is not doing feminism a favor by basically alleging “all who believe men evolved to hunt and women to gather are chauvinists”.







  • Clearest difference I can see is:

    • people who act more in the interest of society and less in the interest of those in power get arrested
    • people who help those in power tighten the leash on society (fuckerberg, muskrat, etc) get courted and don’t ever face consequences

    In other words: A high profile person in tech being threatened with arrest / being arrested by western countries is a pretty good sign that they were not cooperating with our totalitarian overlords & providing us with ways to preserve our privacy.











  • While security has nothing to do with my disgust for docker and people advocating its use, docker adds a layer of complexity, which means it is not necessarily more secure.

    What is extremely bad about docker:

    1. it enables extremely shitty configuration control on the side of a developer. There are way too many developers who have a chaotic approach to configurations, and instead of being forced to write a proper installation and configuration guide from scratch, and thereby making themselves(!) aware of active configuration changes they made to make their system work, they just roll out the docker container they develop in, without remembering most of the configurations they made. Which, naturally, means that they are unable to assist in troubleshooting problems or reproduce issues that users might have.

    In general, if you can’t write a good user manual, or at least clearly identify needed dependencies and configurations, you should not be developing software for other people.

    1. it combines the disadvantages of a VM (shitty performance) and running directly on the host OS (sandboxing is not nearly as good as on a VM)

    2. it creates insane bloat, by completely bypassing the concept of shared libraries and making people download copies of software they already have on their system

    3. it adds a lot of security risks because the user would have to not only review the source code they are compiling and installing, but also would have to scan all the dependencies and what-not, and would basically have to trust the developer and/or anyone distributing an image that they did not add any malware.