🇮🇹 🇪🇪 🖥
Yeah, but you don’t need anything besides the runtime with kubernetes. Podman is completely unnecessary since kubelet does the container orchestration based on Kubernetes control plane. Running podman is like running docker, unnecessary attack surface for an API that is not used by anybody (in Kubernetes).
I run k0s at home, FWIW, tried k3s too :)
Why would anybody use podman for k8s…containerd is the default for years.
For too long it told men they can treat women however they want
This is demonstrably false, as we have certain narratives that are literally millennia old (latin literature) about courtship, romantic gestures, protection and all the other stuff usually associated with how men should treat women. Usually this is some form of protection/care for a lower/weaker being, but it is absolutely a way society has been telling men how to tell women for centuries.
I would say that what you said applies not to feminism in general (who historically had strong links to class struggle and anticapitalism), but to a part of the modern status quo feminism which is focused purely on individuals and has been absorbed by the ruling class (e.g., once the CEO is a woman, the goal is reached). This is not a representation of feminism in general though, and I would say the same can apply to many other movements as well (e.g., ambientalism, antiracism, etc.) that (in part) lost their revolutionary nature and are left fighting for small changes within the status quo.
I think that in fact in at least some cases the lack of respect (or general ability to live a relationship with a man in a mutually loving way) is exactly due to that education. At the end of the day the flipside of the “subservient” attitude is that the man in the relationship is represented as a provider, with all the gender stereotypes that come with it: lack of emotions, self-reliance and of course the expectation for him to be a provider. I would say that most of the examples of bad relationships in this thread boil down to exactly these dynamics.
Also we are not anymore in the 1950, so that education today mostly happens implicitly, but it also gets mixed up with a lot of other messages from the wider society.
I personally also disagree about the fact that men are not taught how to fit in their gender role. I think they are, since very little, symmetrically to how women are too and possibly even more explicitly: you need to protect women (incl. sacrificing because that’s what heroes do), the whole courtship thing, the fact that as a man you are responsible to provide for others, that there are certain activities that are manly, etc… Essentially is the exact same problem: gender stereotypes and sexism go both ways and impact both genders, although in different ways.
Right, violence works usually works to eradicate ideas and standardize morality!
This is not even a slope, it is the application of the same principle applied by people who have different views and morality.
Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative
Just a thought: what happens when that “we” is people who - say - think the courts and the police are not doing their job in sending home all “these illegal immigrants” or something like that?
And Musk, and the Hungarian boxer, and many more around the World. This has been a worldwide case, not just a private US shitshow.
I had to search, and I did find a few articles talking about a rumor.
I don’t think the two events are of same scope and magnitude. The Khelif’s case has been a worldwide media case, what I found for was very US-specific and limited to some niche deranged corner of the internet (https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/07/27/katie-ledecky-trans-rumors/ listed Facebook and Twitter posts from individuals and 2 articles).
Possibly I shouldn’t have used US athletes as example. Given how the topic is so controversial there, I am quite sure you can find a few idiots who would make this claim about any athlete.
Sure! FYI, simplelogin can create aliases with prefix! I usually get service-{random 5 chars}@simplelogin.com, so you can still sort by folder using prefixes.
That seems both unlikely and - to be honest - completely exaggerated and useless.
None of those, really. Just that downplaying successful women doesn’t happen as much in sport, and when it does it’s not by stating they are men.
If %10 of successful women have ever been downplayed because of their gender (due to unconscious biases for example) vs %1 of successful men, then this is still a handful of examples which nevertheless points to a significant bias.
when a man breaks a record he is a super human, when a woman breaks a record she is a man.
How did I miss the point? To me it seems clear that what you were saying that women can’t be successful, if they are, they are considered men (because men have success).
I am not fixating on the example, sorry, it’s the whole thesis you condensed into this sentence that I am fixated on. Women’s success can be downplayed in many ways. Either way, in sports in 2024 I don’t think this is as much of a problem as it is - say - in business. Most importantly, I think this case had not much to do with downplaying Imane’s success (the whole case started waaaay earlier she won the medal), but simply with other factors.
You can take any other boxer, I specifically chose black and “masculine” athletes as examples to show that even race/body type alone was not the determining factor. In these Olympic games you have just Imane’s example: how can you call this a trend or make general statements with one case (not even the Taiwanese boxer got attention)?
What do you mean? Comparing the rate at which women are subject to such effects vs men is a worse statistic than saying “but many successful women are not subject to such effects”? If there is a systematic bias towards women’s success being downplayed, you cannot call this an isolated incident of stereotypical bias.
Men don’t have a category to which they are wrongfully assigned when they win sports. This is also because men are the higher category in most sports (i.e., higher performers), so it is a parallel that simply doesn’t make sense. So yes. It is a worse statistics because men who are victim of gender stereotypes are generally not the ones who excel at sports (men who are called women in general break the masculine stereotype of the muscular and competitive guy - and these unsurprisingly are not characteristics common in elite athletes).
If there is a systematic bias towards women’s success being downplayed
But this was not your claim either. Your claim is that downplaying is done by specifically saying those women are men. The whole point here is on the cause, not the existence of the phenomenon in general.
To be honest I don’t consider something being Russian as automatically 100% false. This case from the IBA seems likely made up, or at least it is until they provide further proof, which they didn’t so far.
That said, this is irrelevant in this particular conversation. Real or not, that precedent is in my opinion partly responsible for why people decided to attack this particular athletes. I agree with you on the next country also playing a role.
Basically my whole argument is that there are multiple factors that made this a case. The fact that she “broke records” or “had success” is generally very low in the list, imho.
but there are other very successful women who have not been treated that way
What I am actually saying is that the vast majority of successful women athletes didn’t suffer from this at this time at all. If this argument works only for Imane Khelif (not even the Taiwanese boxer, who has been mostly ignored), out of the hundreds of women who just won medals, maybe it is not an argument that can be generalized to “women of success”, and other causes have to be searched.
This to me is basic common sense: if a thesis works only on a handful of examples and there are hundreds of counter examples, maybe the thesis is wrong. A tendency would require also more examples.
Those look nothing like “tools” to me.
I will make it simpler: In this very thread a person talked about “high testosterone”. Why they didn’t say the same about the 99% of the women who won competitions? Probably because of a combination of factors:
To me the combination of the above is a much better explanation of the causes for which people attacked this particular boxer, and not the many other women of success, including black and including masculine (e.g., Simone Biles, or Grace Bullen).
historically of women whose success has been deliberately downplayed because she does not fit the stereotypical women in their head vs men who suffered from the same
I really don’t see how this measurement can lead to any conclusion. How can you not measure the amount of women who don’t fit the stereotypical woman aspect and yet whose success has not been downplayed due to their aspect (i.e., people called them men)?
I doubt that fight can be counted as “exceptionally good performance”, but anyway why the same didn’t happen for those that both performed exceptionally well and actually set records?
There are so many examples of that not happening that makes me seriously doubt it identifies the right cause(s).
I can’t really make an exhaustive comparison. I think k3s was a little too opinionated for my taste, with lots of rancher logic in it (paths, ingress, etc.). K0s was a little more “bare”, and I had some trouble in the past with k3s with upgrading (encountered some error), while with k0s so far (about 2 years) I never had issues. k0s also has some ansible role that eases operations, I don’t know if now also k3s does. Either way, they are quite similar overall so if one is working for you, rest assured you are not missing out.