Something in me refuses to believe that these people knowingly and intentionally harm women. But it sure as hell looks intentional.

Most people don’t do any of this “intentionally” in the sense that they are aware of the harm they cause. It doesn’t even enter the realm of moral consideration.

To many, there is a genuine belief of superiority that is entirely subconscious. The easiest example is classic mysogyny in a relationship - the woman is “emotional” and therefore the man should be the one to handle “business”. That’s not just 1950s oppression. Some variation of that thought process is shockingly prevalent across generations.

That man doesn’t really think he’s harming his woman. He thinks he’s helping, by being the man of the house. That same logic applies outside of romance. “I am more rational than she is, therefore I should talk now and she shouldn’t.”

That’s not a thought. That’s just a foundational belief that spawns all the other thoughts.

Ever been in an argument with another adult, and a child joined in with some naive half-informed emotional take on society?

An adult usually placates the child - explains, briefly, why they’re wrong - and returns to arguing with the other adult.

That’s how a lot of men see women by default. As inferior, naive, ill-informed, emotional creatures. Not consciously. Not intentionally. Many mysogynists genuinely seem to have the same intentions as the adult to the child - to placate and educate.

But its fucked up, and it’s important to acknowledge that it simmers under he surface. The reason all of this is so complicated and messy is that it is so hard to see mysogyny for what it is.

You genuinely can’t know if a single interaction with a single male was an example of mysogyny, because sometimes humans just condescend to each other. Sometimes humans are just shitty to each other.

But women experience so many of these experiences in aggregate that they can’t give the benefit of the doubt to every man they meet, especially when the man himself might not understand his own implicit biases.

They do not, like almost all mammals they are dichromatic! It’s mostly us and some primates that can see in three wavelengths. Although interestingly enough, fish and birds can see in four wavelengths. Makes me wonder if that contributed to smaller cats being mostly gray and black, to just reduce as much light as possible?

They seem to be genuinely trying to provide information about a tool that they find preferable to your solution. And you’re not even the OP they were responding to. Nobody in this thread has called you or your solution lazy.

A bash snippet extension is “an extension [for a code editor] that provides a collection of snippets for bash scripting.” It’s a tool that is purpose-built to tell you bash commands on the fly, but smaller, more efficient, and easier to install than a local LLM.

The user you are replying to appears to prefer this because it will also tell you the same bash command every time you ask (non-deterministic outputs can be different for identical requests)

deleted by creator