Steve

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
abq
[–] Steve 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure you know what post scarcity means.

Imagine a world where nobody needs to work, but everyone can still have any material desire filled at any time.

Think Star Trek. Unlimited energy resources, combined with replicators which use that endless energy to create unlimited stuff without any labor required.

[–] Steve 13 points 2 months ago

It really is the most efficient way to manage and trade scarce resources. Going back to a barter system wouldn't be possible with the size and scope of a global economy.

[–] Steve 1 points 2 months ago

Is the demand low, or were the expectations unrealistic?
Nobody likes to blame their own estimates I guess.

[–] Steve 3 points 2 months ago

Not too complicated. There are already LLMs spewing that nonsense.

[–] Steve 7 points 2 months ago

I'm generally not a sit com person.
But that sounds cute. I'd give it a chance.

[–] Steve 6 points 2 months ago

Sure they ask for a rematch.
Unless they're afraid they'll get humiliated again.

[–] Steve 45 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The most profitable league in all of sports...
Is being killed?

I don't think that means what they think it means.

[–] Steve 5 points 2 months ago

I loged in to my account for the first time in over a year, to ask them about starting their own Fediverse instances for public communications. Specifically Mastodon and Lemmy.

[–] Steve 3 points 2 months ago

Prettier, sure. But less practical, functionally.

[–] Steve 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Oh! That's better.
One of the images had a van looking one, the caption said was the electric.

I thinks it's the back one in your image.

[–] Steve 7 points 2 months ago (11 children)

Ugly in an iconic way.
Clearly designed for practicality.
They look great to drive with all that visibility.

On the other hand the electric version just looks like a disappointing van.

[–] Steve 2 points 2 months ago

I looked at both of those.
The first is conflating Sex and Gender. As I said, sex isn't defined by chromosomes and specific genes. It is partially determined by them, and other factors, such as in you temperature dependent example. But again Male and Female are terms used throughout all sexually reproducing lifeforms. Not just Humans. The terms are defined by the reproductive role of the animals gametes; not their genes or anatomy or anything else.

The Beyond XX & XY chart you provided shows a whole host of genetic disorders that can result in a range of outcomes that mix male and female traits in humans. Then it tries to assign genders onto those mixes of traits. But gender isn't determined by genes, or anatomy. It's determined by society and social convention. Do you see what I'm saying?

The statement "She is male" is consistent with a separation of gender from sex. It does leave an open question as to the use of Man and Woman. I'm torn on that one myself. Traditionally Man and Woman are terms of sex, while Masculine and Feminine are terms of gender. My first impulse is to maintain that. But calling her a man, seems different than calling her a male. So I can see changing man and woman to terms of gender, while keeping male and female as terms of sex. I'm not sure we really need a separate word for "human male" anyway. Most of the time there's plenty of context to indicate if we're talking about humans or other animals.

view more: ‹ prev next ›