Makes sense considering both the correlations between being an autistic spectrum male and adopting a sex-incongruent gender identity, and being an autistic spectrum male and working in tech.
>"The chair of the CMA, its chief executive and the rest of the board are appointed by the business secretary of the elected government" if I'm reading this correctly, UK citizens elect a government, the government appoints a business secretary, and then the business secretary appoints the entire CMA? So that would be two layers of disconnect from the voter.
In what sense? I'm not complaining about it, just observing that the article appears to defend it as elected when it is unelected. Smith's complaint potentially being factually true doesn't make it a valid criticism.
It's normal for humans to compare themselves to their peers. That's how we have achieved the level of greatness that we currently enjoy: by competing. Males do it positively and females do it negatively. My theory is that this has gotten out of hand with the boom of Instagram and it shows.
I don't agree that this is Meta's fault. They gave females a window to the world and that made them depressed. Does this mean Meta should just close shop? Are they responsible for the mental health of their users?
I love how everyone here is blaming something different: parents, Meta, advertisement, political divisiveness, urban planning, society, lack of personal responsibility. Soon there will be more reasons, like violence and money. And they're right, sure. All of those are partially responsible.
But I feel we tend to give a pass to the people who are actually producing the content that is damaging a generation and making bank, as if they have no agency or responsibility.
Instagram would probably be great overnight if those people suddenly all disappeared.
It's similar to swengs - before remote work one could be a king of their own place for a lot of money, now swengs need to compete for much cheaper with people from all around the world who might cheat in unimaginable ways to land a job. Like all those plastic-perfect pseudocelebrity influencers on Instagram sucking all ad money, making droves of people super depresses when they look in a mirror. It's also much easier to get in touch with them directly, damaging opportunities of worse-looking real people to socialize.
"Beauty filters", in the form of cosmetics, have been widely used by both men and women at least since the days of ancient Egypt, 5000 years ago. Likely before... that's just the earliest record we have.
I agree on some premisces, but not all. I do not think your sex/hormones/whatever influence if you do it positively or negatively.
It's either the nature of what you're competing in, or how is it viewed by the society at large. Not sure which yet, I haven't thought enough about it.
My two main non-work, non tabletop activities are now windsurfing and rock climbing, two activities that are split roughly 70-30 male/female. We compete the same.
> Males do it positively and females do it negatively.
Such a weird statement. I guess it has the implicit “generally”. But a lot of ways that men compete can be more negative from a physical point of view. Sure I won’t feel bad about my self but If I challenge someone’s macho in the wrong state or neighborhood I might end up with Bullet Holes in my body.
You could say the same about many SaaS projects. Why pay for an expensive GPU upfront and then some guy who can install it, configure it, create some sort of interface for you to talk to it... when you can just pay openai to do it for less money?
Because GPU-Servers that can run a typical LLM are less than 5k, which includes installation. Really, running an LLM seems to be no more complicated than running a NAS from a system administrators perspective.
