I have been using X11 since 1996, and I never felt that it was very good. Sure, at the start it was better the then state-of-the-art desktop (Windows 95), mostly thanks to Linux, but that advantage went away in 2001 when OS/X was released. And even Windows went past it at some point, perhaps around Windows 7 or 8.

Wayland took a long time to get there, but it definitely is there today.

PHP is Russian. Used to be huge, caused lots of problems, now slowly dwindling away. Its supporters keep saying how it’s still better than the competition.

The person you replied to said that

All fascist ideologies will use the argument of “Protecting the children”

Did they? Did you just make a reverse strawman fallacy?

Hey don’t blame me. You’re the one who used the A-word in a place filled with OCD nitpickers and in a discussion around CSAM.

Time to close all the fascist schools and put the kids back in factories as Marx intended.

What is confusing to me is why would it matter to Putin if Trump lied here? The Russian mode of government is lying and deception after all.

Does he actually think that his voters want Ukraine to lose? Oh fuck, do his voters actually want Ukraine to lose?

I don’t know. Rust seems like a better C++ to me rather than a better C. Plain C is a very simple language.

While shopping around for a distro for my gaming box, I tried NixOS and Bazzite. Both were fine, but the atomicity made everything more complicated without any practical upsides for my use case.

So I’m just using Nobara, which is a gaming-optimized Fedora. For my laptop, I’m just using Arch, it’s much less hassle. The declarativeness of centralization of NixOS is alluring, but I don’t really need it.

Almost is absolutely \s

Probably mostly because almost nobody uses it.

Yes. Yes you do. Just like you would if 1% of the matter in the universe violated the first law of thermodynamics.

I’m sorry, I’m not going to continue explaining very basic concepts of science to you.

Well, you failed trying to convince me you have any idea what you’re talking about, but at least you succeeded in emphasizing a stereotype. Have a nice day.

Ok, so how would you reconcile these two things into one better theory:

• males have smaller gametes
• females have larger gametes
• there are some (about 1%) exceptions to the above two

Do you throw it all away because of that 1%?

Would you say that biology is not a science? Is your point that if a theory has exceptions, it needs to be replaced with a better theory?

I’m not absolutely certain as it’s not exactly my main area of study, but I think nature and biology don’t fit 100% well into such thinking.

but that there are exceptions, which is not scientific

Why would you say that? How do you define “scientific”? Might you be conflating it with some pure form of science, like mathematics or pure logic?

Since you apparently can’t find any scientists who agree with you

I’m not sure what we’re conflicted here about, so let’s clarify: Are you saying that I cannot find any scientists to agree with me on my claim that males have smaller gametes and females have larger gametes? Also: what’s the standard we’re aiming at here? What do I need to find to convince you that I’m right? Do I need to find a live actual scientist that answers this question for me, or do you need a scientific paper or something? I’m guessing that a basic biology book is not enough for you, since this fact definitely is in every one of them.

Who made this the accepted definition?

Evolution, as far as we can tell.

But feel free to prove me wrong since you came up with links that don’t support your claim.

I usually approach these things from the point of view of trying to reach truth together, not from the point of view of trying to use sources as hammers to beat down your opponent. Are you different from me in this way?

Would be interesting to see something that could prove or disprove if transwomen (or transmen too, I guess) get any benefits. All I’ve seen is inconclusive or partial results (see my other comment). For that reason, I don’t think IOC’s guidelines can be thought of as being finalized or uncontroversial.

Females have larger gametes. Males have smaller gametes. Just because this doesn’t apply to 100% of cases doesn’t make this an accepted definition – everything has exceptions in nature. 98-99% is good enough for a categorization though.

Does this affect how transwomen do in women’s category? Probably 98-99% not (hah), since IOC has declared this all works just fine?

Still it’s still a bit controversial, e.g. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref this study showed one set of cases where hormone treatment removed most differences in transwomen vs women but they remained significantly faster runners.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846503/ this seems to show that transwomen lose very little of their biological advantage. "Rather, the data show that strength, lean body mass, muscle size and bone density are only trivially affected. "

deleted by creator

I actually got NixOS after the latest time I tried it. But I also got that I don’t want it, Arch is much simpler in all the good ways.

And perhaps something like https://github.com/kiviktnm/decman can some day give us part of Nix’s power without going all-in with the functional declarative thingamadoodle.