How exactly are appimages annoying? I think they are awesome tbh

I mean, the commenter is right. Both can be true. I'd even say both is true.

Trump is not understanding tariffs and is lying.

What is so bad about "Cold in here"?

Probably not. Translation and language is perfect for AI to work on. People here may hate it, but no business in that market can afford hundreds of employees when the competition uses AI.

Under socialism i would just be a normal peasant.

Nah, you'd be slaving a 12 hour shift in the coal mine.

Not as far as I know, sadly. I wish we'd just defederate from blahaj. That place pretends to be a "Nice safe space for everyone UwU" but is nothing but a breeding ground for hate and negativity. Hexbear at least doesn't pretend to be a good place ...

Kinder haben in politischen Diskussionen generell nichts zu suchen.

Average blahaj user if he's not allowed to be toxic lmao

A company that is known for doing shitty things does shitty things.

Color me fucking surprised.

Honestly, at this point, I have ZERO sympathy for people who are still actively using microsoft products and running into problems.

Holy shit I'm not getting pissy about anything I'm saying I WISH PEOPLE WOULD MAKE MORE INFORMED DECISIONS IN OTHER AREAS OF THEIR DAILY LIFE

That looks awesome. Duck is one of the few things I just can't nail properly at home ... my chicken and beef is amazing, but duck ... idk. It never really hits the spot.

Bro he could've done a single online search and disproved himself in literal seconds.

The funny thing is, that microsoft has been doing that for years now and people just ate it, including forced updates, changes to default applications, limitations on hardware etc. It's kinda funny that copilot is the drop that made the barrel spill.

These exceptions exist for a reason, whether or not they fit your personal worldview.

Yes, these do exist - but that still doesn't mean it's a counterpoint to the fact that the "status quo", if you will, is what I described earlier.

This is just a bad argument, and has been used to justify all kinds of awful things

Okay, but that doesn't mean the argument doesn't hold in this particular case.

why would the fact that humans have always done things a certain way imply that that’s a good thing?

Nobody talks about it being good. I have made zero judgement about if that is a good or bad thing - it's just a thing. But I feel that the "old times", where humans were much much less self-conscious and organized, is a solid indicator to how we would act if we were more living off of instinct instead of societal pressure.

Rigid gender roles have only truly served half of the human population. Even so, men have also suffered in other ways because of them. Why shouldn’t we work to better everyone’s lives, in as many ways as we can manage?

I don't think you understood my comment. I'm not saying that gender roles are a good thing. What I AM saying is that it is, from a biological standpoint, very easy to determine who is a woman and who is not. I'm not saying that every woman should do "womanly" things and every man should do "manly" things.

This is demonstrably false.

No, it's really not, but I do agree that finding factual information regarding this topic is nearly impossible these days as it's a topic completely enveloped by political bias and everyone tries to bend the facts as much into his desired direction as possible. However, from my viewpoint and some discussions I had with people who are very well versed in that topic, the human is a rather traditional mammal that also behaves like one - including that only women are able to give birth to children.

Okay, you're getting kinda annoying here. I was talking about biological genders and you start talking about dysphoria, which has absolutely nothing to do with that. I just have the feeling you are trying to derail the conversation to bitch about things I never even talked about.

I'm not going to respond to any other comments of you, but I do wish you a nice evening. :)

... which I'm not talking about.

cats live solitary lives and therefore do not divide tasks between genders

??? No they're not? Cats do raise their young what the fuck. The female is also the only one that can ensure the kitten survive as she's the one producing the milk which is necessary. Male cats usually don't give a fuck about the kitten and just bring food for the mother.

The only exceptions to this is lions (which is sorta a cat), where females do everything and the males are just lying around.

The idea that females primarily take care of children makes no sense since in most species (incl. most mammals) kids grow up pretty quickly ... In most animals there is no sharp distinction of tasks between males and females

Very cool you think so. Yet it's the case. I don't know how I can prove something that obvious to you. Just pick any common mammal you might find outside and there's a 95% chance that the female animal will take care of the child.

Are you trying to seem more stupid than you are right now? Is a human with two arms not the standard because there are a small amount of people with more or less? Is a cat with a tail no longer the standard because there are cats without tails?

A standard is a standard if the majority of cases fit it. If 95% of all humans had brown hair, that would be the standard. Period.

Stop coming up with these dumbass arguments.

Only about one out of every hundred people is born with red hair

Which is significantly more than people having a third arm.

If one out of every hundred people was born with three arms

Yes, but they're not. That's the entire point.

There’s various **disorders **that can cause

Exactly. And that's what they are. Disorders. That doesn't mean it breaks the status quo. If 100 people are born with two arms and one person is born with three, we don't go around saying "humans can be born with 2 or 3 arms!". No, we still say that humans are born with two arms.

Trying to extend definitions to include every possible whim of nature is completely futile.