Just a shit post unfortunately.

Has Lemmy become Facebook?

For anyone looking for more history around this, the economist have a podcast series called Boom!

They fall out over a minor implementation detail and get forked.

Cock and balls would be the baseline here I feel.

In a way I find pop sciency types that go after religion even worse. Like science doesn’t argue anything about religion, it’s set up to be unprovable - so don’t argue, if it’s not falsifiable it’s not science you’re just grinding a personal axe.

What makes you think it’s so mechanised? Material is often cut on bandsaw in stacks inches thick, they’re sewn on machine, sure, but manually controlled by a human. Different designers, different factories, different QA levels.

I read a thing (not sure if it’s true) that the reason there’s no pockets in women’s clothing is that women have more diverse body shapes than men. Pockets are designed not to interrupt the lines of the garment where possible - it’s more straightforward to place men’s pockets because they’re going to be in a more predictable place when worn Vs women where it ends up making the clothes fit poorly.