𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍

       🅸 🅰🅼 🆃🅷🅴 🅻🅰🆆. 
 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍 𝖋𝖊𝖆𝖙𝖍𝖊𝖗𝖘𝖙𝖔𝖓𝖊𝖍𝖆𝖚𝖌𝖍 
  • 14 Posts
  • 1.49K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 26th, 2022

help-circle

  • Hmmm.

    I’d phrase it differently. Unrealistic expectations of the opposite sex [^1] exist by both sexes, but that there outcomes for women when the stereotypes of men hold true are often more dangerous. One is saying it isn’t sexist; the other is saying that there’s a vast difference in risk. This becomes one of those tautological arguments where women can’t be sexist because sexism is redefined to mean “it can only be sexist if it’s men doing it.”

    The “Would you rather a bear or…” question could be reused in a very uncomfortable way. You could swap men with a group of yoing, black, inner city men and rural white men for women. But instead of demonstrating that men are the issue and women the victims, suddenly it’d be black men who are the victims and rural white men the problem. And, yet, the fear and the risk of confirmation of stereotypes is the same - only in this case, believing those stereotypes makes people racist.

    These sorts of tautologies - only whites can be racist, only men can be sexist - is sloppy, lazy, and dangerous, because it prevents introspection and always externalizes blame. I’m not saying that you are arguing a tautology, but that’s the essence of this thread: minimizing sexism against men in the basis that it can’t be sexism if rape isn’t involved. Which is exactly how this thread went, isn’t it?

    I want to reiterate that I agree that there’s a false equivalency; consequences for women can be higher. My argument is that it doesn’t make it not sexism to broadly brush all men with a demeaning funny little tweet.

    Also: there should be a Godwin’s Law for rape. The conversation was about household stereotypes. That was a bit of a leap.


  • Greater opportunity, yes; however, cash is still legal tender in the US and it used to be illegal to not accept it as payment (this may have changed). And, as the payer, make sure you get a receipt so they can’t screw you and if the landlord doesn’t pay taxes, you’re not culpable - it’s their responsibility, not your’s.

    Cash is fine. The receipt is important, though, for a number of reasons. Not many people are going to go withdraw $1,100 just to pay rent, unless they’re getting a discount for cash, which is a good indication there’s some tax dodging going on.

    Even if you trade sex for rent, get a receipt saying you paid your rent.



  • This guy is looking at the long view. If you read it to the end, he’s starting his own garlic farm and is going to constantly undercut Jim’s prices, so that Jim won’t make any (or many) sales, until Jim goes out of business. He’s doing this even if it means a loss for himself; his goal is to ruin Jim’s business.

    Now, this is what’s known in Birdman culture as “a Dick Move,” but Jim seems a bit of a dick himself. However, while it might screw up the beginning of my season, if I were Jim I’d simply pivot to onions.

    It all comes down to how far OP’s poster is willing to take it. He certainly seems petty enough to pursue all paths, at whatever cost, to prevent Jim from being able to still produce at that farmer’s market; changing crops as Jim changes crops. If Jim’s invested enough, he could rotate his crops between a half-dozen different root stocks and the odds Vengeance Boy would happen to match whatever he’s selling that season would be slim and spoil his plan.




  • I can see that, although TBH I almost never have to “admin” EndeavourOS. I just upgrade every once in a while.

    Most important to me is being able to find and install whatever software I want, and I have a string preference that it either be installed in my ~, or be managed by the package manager. I really dislike sideloading software globally. And Arch does this better than most. AUR is massive, and packages are trivial to write and install in the rare event something isn’t in AUR.






  • Base Arch can be fussy, but that’s because there’s a lot to set up, so many opportunities to forget things and only discover them later.

    I ran Artix on a laptop for about a year; that was a constant PITA, although I still value their goals.

    But EndeavourOS has been an entirely different matter. It’s a “just works” Arch derivative.

    I had so many fewer problems with Arch that I went through the effort to convert my 3 personal cloud servers from Debian to it. I went through a lot of work to replace thee default Mint on an ODroid to Arch, and it’s been so much better. I put Endeavor on the last two non-servers I installed. So, yes, I personally find out far more reliable and easier to work with than Ubuntu, Debian, or Mint.

    That said, I had dad install Mint on a new computer he bought because I had to do it over the phone and he never, ever, upgrades his packages, and almost never installs anything. If all I’m going to do is install it once and then never change anything, Mint is easier. But for a normal use case where I’m regularly updating and installing software, Arch is far easier and more reliable.



  • A studio should be able to afford a good LTO tape drive for at least one backup copy; LTO tapes last over 30 years and suffer less from random bitrot than spinning disks. Just pay someone to spend a month duplicating the entire archive every couple of decades. And every decade you can also consolidate a bunch of tapes since the capacity has kept increasing; 18TB tapes are now available: $/MB it’s always far cheaper to use tape.

    They could have done that with the drives, but today you’d have to go find an ATA IDE or old SCSI card (of you’re lucky) that’ll work on a modern motherboard.

    But I’d guess their problem is more not having a process for maintaining the archives than the technology. Duplicating and consolidating hard drives once a year would have been relatively cheap, and as long as they verified checksums and kept duplicates, HDs would have been fine too.




  • I get the joke, and ha ha.

    However: it’s been a long time since I’ve watched through TNG, but in TOS operating a transporter was a bit of an art, requiring skill. Like piloting the ship. It wasn’t a “push a button” exercise; it was reading meters, adjusting variables, acquiring locks… and frequently, something would interfere that required real work on the transporter operator which could result in loss of the transported persons. You wanted a skilled transporter operator if you were the one being transported. I don’t recall it having changed much by TNG; transporting was skilled labor, and experience counted. It wasn’t a fully automated “push a button” operation.

    Not always, but often it was a senior engineer operating the transporter when bridge crew were being transported, especially in hostile situations.

    I can appreciate the premise of this series; they’re funny and creative. When it gets to this level, the dissonance distracts me from the humor :shrug:.

    Edit: no, really. Like, operating a transporter was always portrayed a little like playing a musical instrument. It makes less sense than Picard being able to raise shields or set alert levels from his chair with one of his buttons, than having to tell someone to “go to red alert.” Why didn’t Picard have an “evasive maneuvers” button? Transporting has to be at least as complicated as targeting phasers or torpedoes, right?