![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/913b482d-9012-449f-bc87-b1f4463e7154.jpeg)
There are tribal people that live in matriarchy. If that answers your question. Also, the amazons are not just a myth.
There are tribal people that live in matriarchy. If that answers your question. Also, the amazons are not just a myth.
I think you went off on a tangent. This is not what I was complaining about. Also, I do not have a problem with “gender stuff” - I just have a problem with a lack of objectivity.
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”.
I guess I should have clarified in my original comment that I was exaggerating - obviously, C++ doesn’t get as bad as python, not even into the same ballpark.
My emphasis was on “don’t use C++ like you would python” because that’s not good advice imo.
Not quite, but smart pointers in the wrong location can be quite wasteful in terms of CPU cycles.
So, basically, use it like you would use Python.
That’s a great way to get performance as shitty as python’s.
I meant that thanks to abstract art we’re willing to forgive “image glitches” in art by deep learning models.
Generative AI is much better at art than coding.
Mostly because humans invented this convenient thing called abstract art - and since then tolerates pretty much everything that looks “strange” as art. Must have been a deep learning advocate with a time machine who came up with abstract art.
Clearest difference I can see is:
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.
One good alternative: codeberg.org
A censor happy mod thinks they are the greatest… How pathetic :D
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
For the purpose of protecting important data, the distinction really doesn’t matter. And the good old xkcd comic has a point - for many people, all relevant data is in the user’s accessible storage area anyways. Hence me running almost all internet applications and steam in a jail.
Okay, fair point, let me rephrase: if someone knows what kernel (admin) level execution means, and installs a game that requires this on a computer where they keep important data, they are a dumbass mtherfcker :) Generally speaking though: most people shouldn’t be allowed to use technology - humans are unbelievably stupid for the most part.
we just need one pvp game with kernel level anti cheat
Leaving aside that security patches should be done, if you install that kind of game on a system where you have any data worth protecting, you’re a dumb ass mtherfcker. Sorry, but seriously, that’s just how it is.
what a pathetic weird dumbass
The mistake is public. This is where people see it and should also see the correction. The fact that you get your knickers in a twist over a simple word correction, is worrysome. It’s not like I said “lol u so dumb OP”.
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:
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.
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)
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
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.
But you asked exactly that - and I gave you examples of women that “were hunting and thus using their skill” and there was no patriarchy in some of those systems - even into the present.
Also - let’s be real - most men nowadays who talk about “men hunting” are fat slobs who couldn’t hunt a chicken with a limp ;)