I think most all of us here on Lemmy are people with technical background. Most of my professional contacts remained using Reddit, Twitter and even excited when Threads launched.

If you are non-tech background, please comment and share what you do for life.

If you have tech background, upvote this to help promote this post so that we can find more non-tech users on Lemmy.

        • You’re conflating physical strength with gender, but when it comes to who can do the work, only one of those is relevant.

          I think we’re on the same page, I’m just pointing out that the statement “women can do any work a man can, as long as high physical strength is not required” is just as inaccurate as saying “all men can do work that requires high physical strength”. As a man, I’ll be the first to say there are a huge number of women who are more physically capable than me. Turns out, a task that requires high physical strength doesn’t need a man, it needs a person with high physical strength.

          • I don’t think you were replying to me, but objectively the average man, of similar size, is going to be stronger than me, in the brute force, or explosive force aspect. It’s just an unfortunate fact of human genetics. Men typically have denser bones, ligaments, and tendons, muscle fiber, more muscle mass, and testosterone to help build and maintain all of it. Women are said to be something like 60% as strong as a man on average. HOWEVER, women typically have better stamina, longevity, are better at enduring trauma, etc.

            I am by no means frail or weak, and am probably stronger than a lot, but I will never be as strong, or as lean as a man with equal work put toward it.

            • There is no disagreement that, in the current day and age of the human species, men are biologically predisposed to be more physically capable on average. There is no contention about that.

              The point I am making is that two bodies with similar bone density, muscle mass, testosterone, etc. are going to be physically capable of the same thing, regardless of their genders. The gender is a red herring, what matters is the capability of doing the work.

              As I told the other commenter,

              We have a history of giving jobs to men because we’ve conflated their gender with other capabilities, not because they actually are the most capable. But my point is, we’re smart enough as a species to not do that anymore.

              • But my point is, we’re smart enough as a species to not do that anymore.

                Lol. Are we? Maybe it’s just my small world but I don’t see that at all. I encounter sexism CONSTANTLY. Hell, scroll down to the bottom of the comments on my main reply, it’s right there for everyone to see.

                The point I am making is that two bodies with similar bone density, muscle mass, testosterone, etc. are going to be physically capable of the same thing, regardless of their genders.

                But gender does matter because one gender is predisposed to be bigger, stronger, have more testosterone, and has the ability to be stronger/build muscle more easily. I’d love to agree with you, that in a perfect world, gender didn’t matter in brute strength, but it does. All things are not equal out of the box.

                Now, as I have clearly proven, brute strength isn’t everything, in fact most of the time it only means so much, but it’s still there regardless. I think a more accurate statement would be something like “strength only gets you so far, capability is more important”

                • Lol I meant it more in a “you’re smart enough to stop leaving the milk out of the fridge, child!” kind of way. I agree sexism is still rampant, and I guess I’m implicitly saying people in the past are somehow excused because they weren’t as intelligent, but what I’m intending to saying is that we’re smart enough now, so we have no excuse.

                  one gender is predisposed to be bigger, stronger, have more testosterone, and has the ability to be stronger/build muscle more easily

                  I see this as a heuristic at best, and an excuse for sexism at worst. In my example above I’m specifically referring to two people who are equally physically capable of doing a task by definition. The man shouldn’t be given preference simply because he’s a man, and men happen to be stronger on average. That’s not relevant when picking someone who can do the job.

          • Sure but you are probably aware that all boys being born have higher strength than females, just because of biology. Then of course in life as we grow, some men don’t maintain that strength and lose it. But I think it’s still accurate to think that men in general are stronger than women, even if there are exceptions.

            Otherwise we are just ignoring a fact of how our bodies are different.

            • But due to how natural selection works, that’s a self-fulfilling argument. Men are biologically stronger specifically because people have made the argument you’re making for hundreds of thousands of years, thereby selecting for the pattern you’re claiming exists.

              When you’re looking for someone to do a task, you aren’t looking for a biological explanation, you aren’t looking for a man, you’re looking for someone who can do the task.

              • I don’t think people have selected for that. It was necessary in the past to be strong to survive and provide for your family. So those genes were selected because those people could survive long enough to have kids. If you were too weak, you didn’t make it.

                • I’m not saying it was deliberate (i.e. artificial) selection, the selection was natural. I’m just saying, think on it more.

                  It was necessary in the past to be strong to survive and provide for your family

                  But you’re saying those genes weren’t required by females for some reason? Why? Honestly the only answer is: because it just happened to work out that way. The evolutionary coin could have just as easily flipped the other way and resulted in women being biologically predisposed to be stronger. We see this in many animal species, in fact.

                  We have a history of giving jobs to men because we’ve conflated their gender with other capabilities, not because they actually are the most capable. But my point is, we’re smart enough as a species to not do that anymore.

        • Eh, it’s still required to work on cars/engines. Thankfully we work on smaller vehicles (Mazda/Nissan mostly) and not some big ass diesel stuff.

          I can “engineer” my way out of most situations, and have been very successful accomplishing things that many men can’t, because they can’t “think outside the box”. What I mean by that is that I have to approach things differently. I have to understand things more completely sometimes, so I can work my way around the lack of brute force, where many men can just push/lift/torque something without thought, and they get complacent. That allows me to see different solutions to things that may stump others.

          That said, I have found instances where I am just not physically big, or strong enough to do something, and need help.

          I also have the benefit of being much smaller, so I can get into places a lot of men can’t. It has its benefits and drawbacks.

          • I believe you, and I have many examples from my own life where girls are outsmarting guys because they are forced to use their brains. Guys sometimes doesn’t because we can just use strength instead, like you said.

            And being smaller and more agile is a huge plus in most situations as well.

            Pretty much agree 100%.

      • I already linked the land speed car we built in another reply (should be easy to find under my original reply). If not lmk.

        I was looking for a link to another car and stumbled on something one of our customers did.

        YouTube video on the “Hakobird” build

        So funny story, I guess. Not so funny for the poor person, ME, who covered themself in fiberglass for weeks for it to be completely ruined by someone else. The part where he shows the wide body kit installed and perfectly aligned and pretty? Yeah. It left our possession to go to paint like that. I spent weeks making it perfect, and I had to re-engineer A LOT of the kit because their mold was off by about 20-30* to the right, so nothing fit. At all. Then the painter ruined it.

        The car has a built SR20DET in it. It did 350whp first day we had it on the dyno, with plenty more room.

        • That is just SO doap.

          The 510 is one of my all time favorite cars ever.

          And the 510 with that front end and that bad ass wide body kit? Absolute perfection.

          SR20DET is just the icing on the cake. Usually you see those KA’s in the 510s, which are great engines and perfect upgrade for auto crossing and stuff. That SR20DET just turns it into another beast.

          Friggin’ blows having the painter ruin all your hard work. You can tell from those shots a lot of care went into it.

          Badass build. Y’all should be proud.

          • Thanks!!!

            Funny enough. We just built two SR20VET engines. And even funnier, they were both going into roadsters. Neither guy knows each other, we didn’t suggest the combo. Just a coincidence.

            We’ve done a few 510s with SR20DE/DET engines now. We actually do a lot of SR engines, both VE/VET and DE/DET.

            We’ve done L series too, but I can’t think of a KA we’ve done that ended up in a 510. Usually they stay in an S chassis.

            We also built an SR20 that ended up in a 300XZ. Yeah…… I still question the thought process behind that one.

            Unrelated, we also built a VQ35 for Dai Yoshihara in 3 days. Moto-IQ did an article about that one too.

            @potato

  • 62 years old woman, semi-retired, only work part time now. I was in the travel business. Found Lemmy thru a Reddit comment a few months ago. Felt the need for a change. Currently with Lemmy, Kbin and Mastodon, trying to find my place.

  • I’m an assembly line worker and have been for about five years now at different factories. Refrigerators, car parts, ag equipment, etc.

    There’s a job opening coming up at a plant that offers college benefits though, so hopefully I get to join y’all in tech in a few years. Hopefully working with so many robots and machines will give me an advantage through sheer osmosis lol

  • I’m a biologist, but have always been fairly techy in my own time outside of my work. Definitely not much of a tech person though, I can’t code or anything like that. Can troubleshoot most of my own technical issues though and built a PC.

  • Non-tech background. I’m a book editor and when the Snoopocalypse happened, most of the niche communities I was a part of were shut down in protest, so I decided to give Lemmy a try. Loving it so far, as it seems way less toxic.

  • non tech, i currently am not working but i have a bachelor’s degree in paleontology and am currently studying for my master’s in museum studies. my partner is a programmer but i’m the one that introduced her to lemmy

  • Not technical at all, I work in Learning & Development at a company. I am always reading the comments and try to learn, but sometimes I have really no clue what you guys are talking about haha!

    Yesterday someone was expleaning about adblocker and all the comments were like: “Yeah, who can live without it…” Well, me I guess? And I saw one that was highly recommended so I downloaded it, because why not try it out right? But apparently it’s not for your phone. Or I didn’t have the right app to support it on my phone.

    I was thinking about asking it in the comments of the thread, but like you said: I think a lot of people here have a tech background and although everyone is very nice, I think the explanation might go over my head.

    I don’t want to give people the feeling I get when I’m trying to explain to my mom over the phone how she can e-mail a file on her computer. It can be very frustrating ;)

    • Then, please ask again and don’t feel bad if someone fails to explain it to you :) If an explanation doesn’t make sense it’s likely that the one giving the explanation skipped a few steps that they think are common-knowledge, but those aren’t.

    • Just fyi if you want to block ads on your phone you can go to your WIFI settings and set DNS to the AdGuard website or some similar service. Google is your friend for step by step guides

        • Sure! An adblocker is a piece of software that helps you to avoid unwanted ads when you’re surfing the internet.

          Here’s how it basically works:

          1. List of ad sources: An adblocker keeps a list of sources of ads, like specific URLs or domains. This list is compiled by dedicated users and organizations who continuously update it.
          2. Blocking requests: Every time you visit a webpage, it sends out requests to fetch the content of the page. Each request URL is checked against the adblocker’s list. If it matches an entry on the list, the adblocker stops the request, so the ad never reaches your browser.
          3. Page element hiding: In addition to blocking sources of ads, many adblockers can also hide elements of a webpage that are often used to display ads.

          As for your second question, yes, there are adblockers that work on phones! Here are a few examples:

          1. AdGuard: available for iOS and Android, offers protection against ad tracking.
          2. Blokada: a free and open-source adblocker for Android.
          3. 1Blocker: a native adblocker for iOS.

          Remember that some websites depend on ad revenue to operate, so it’s good practice to disable your adblocker for sites that rely on ads but don’t misuse them.

  • Pre-Med student here. Just ya average non-average queer neurodivergent zoomer. I’m not from a tech background, but I do use Linux, which basically makes me a programmer 😎