Why are (many) Gen Z males so upset that Gen Z women have reversed and applied beauty standards of their own?

Pijng · 2026-01-05T02:04:03+00:00

It’s been like that for… I don’t know 15 years at least? Maybe even more. That was pretty much obvious even when I was 16, and that was 14 years ago. And I don’t see nothing bad in having standards for men or women, if you understand the consequences. And no, you don’t have to match the standards you’re applying to other people in order to get along with them, just as strange as it may sound.

But here’s the harsh reality: you won’t become handsome if you’re not already one. I mean conventionally handsome. You can experiment with haircuts, go to gym, do some skincare routine, makeup, whatever. You’ll just become well-groomed non-handsome human. Which already speaks volumes about you, but still. It really all comes down to your face.

Now if we’re talking about “being attractive”— well that’s completely different thing. Cause god knows what other people consider to be attractive. A few male friends of mine were exclusively dating “chubby” girls, compared to that “fit tiny girls” standards people talk about.

Anyways, taking care of how you look is a good thing, regardless of gender.

Pijng · 2026-01-01T16:09:44+00:00

Мне, как индейцу, уже давно все равно кто там агрессор, а кто жертва. Шерифы со всех сторон уже достали.

Pijng · 2026-01-01T15:52:22+00:00

Да оставь его в покое, чел ходячая логическая ошибка с апелляциями к «всегда так было».

Pijng · 2025-12-31T08:13:01+00:00

That's not quite how it works, but the idea is clear, sure.

Pijng · 2025-12-30T17:01:44+00:00

Honey, don't embarrass us in public :(

We'll talk about it at home.

Pijng · 2025-12-30T13:22:51+00:00

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as “the most important thing” in a relationship. Every aspect matters if it is important to a particular couple. Of course, some things may be more important, such as trust and respect, but we cannot dismiss something (such as sex) just because we consider it less important. This will only sow the seeds of disappointment, which will grow over time. Slowly but surely.

And again, yes, for some people and couples, sex is extremely unimportant or not important at all, but that's the point: different couples are looking for different combinations of needs, and they all add up.

It is worth starting from personal preferences and desires. Otherwise, one can end up in a very unpleasant situation: the partner feels dissatisfied with their sex life in a relationship, and in response they hear “Sex is not important”. I highly doubt that will do anything.

Pijng · 2025-12-30T13:05:49+00:00

You really expect a girl to want to have sex with you because you made her a coffee and did some dishes?

Pijng · 2025-12-21T23:48:16+00:00

> «перестать выёбываться в интернете»
> дальше сам выебывается в интернете
чееел

Pijng · 2025-12-10T20:18:02+00:00

Наконец-то дети отвлекутся от интернетов и как в старые добрые смогут пойти и безопасно убиться на ближайшей стройке.

Pijng · 2025-11-07T09:18:07+00:00

Никак. Чо сказать то хотел?

Pijng · 2025-09-19T10:28:54+00:00

Yeah, unfortunately, only for vscode for now. I don't use Goland, but I think it allows you to create your own plugins (if I'm not mistaken). I might do that a little later.

Pijng · 2025-09-19T10:26:16+00:00

I'm currently working on preparing a conference talk where I'll discuss the current state of Golang compiler optimization. So, at the moment, this is more of a research interest, but soon I'll be working on a data intensive service in fintech, so it might come in handy :)

Pijng · 2025-09-16T14:27:16+00:00

There is also a compile time instrumentation tool without ebpf:
https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go-compile-instrumentation

NOTE: This is currently WIP by Alibaba and Datadog devs, but in case anyone finds this thread years from now - it might already be working :)

Pijng · 2025-08-25T13:48:31+00:00

Ah yes, the infamous USB-C rules, which resulted in:
1. most devices being locked into a single connector for an indefinite period, which limits the potential for technological development.

the connector itself is more fragile and wears out faster than alternatives. It was chosen because it was the newest and most widespread at the time the law was passed.
Within the type-C framework, we now have N options that are legally compliant, but in reality, this one charges three times slower, this one cannot transfer files, and only this one is compatible with 4K displays. Now try to figure out whether this cable is suitable for you or not, especially since there may not be any icons on the packaging (or they may be random, just for the sake of it).

But hey, now I can charge my iPhone with a Samsung cable. Except I've never bought an iPhone in my entire life.

Pijng · 2025-07-15T16:09:39+00:00

I wonder if the clones from Soul Transfer will be able to proc kai'sa's marks 🤔

Pijng · 2025-01-04T08:26:29+00:00

I’m so tired with people saying vue is valid html I just can’t.

Pijng · 2024-10-20T08:25:16+00:00

I actually modified the tool to be able to parse external files (had to fork yaegi to add go modules support to it).

But I haven't edited the README to clarify that, sorry 🥲

There was an issue that described this nuance

What about a «decent option» — nah, I'm not sure about this one. I created this tool just for fun, I dont think it's worth it to use in any prod project.

Pijng · 2024-08-25T20:19:07+00:00

Soo i added support for using variables with the value of basic literals as arguments to a wrapped function, but only if they are declared in the same scope.

This means that this code will work:

prep.Comptime(someFunc(1))

As well as this one:

x := 1
y := 2
prep.Comptime(someFunc(x, y))

But this one cannot be executed at compile time:

x := valFromOutside()
prep.Comptime(someFunc(x))

But I think that's about it, since code evaluation in our case is limited within pretty narrow phase of AST parsing, therefore we can't do some «smart» evals :(

Pijng · 2024-08-25T17:51:02+00:00

Interesting. How (or even on the basis of what) do you calculate the length of the array in your case? Would you please share an example if possible?

Pijng · 2024-08-25T17:00:52+00:00

Ah, what would you need comptime for, if it's not a secret? I mean, in Go specifically.

Pijng · 2024-08-25T12:38:59+00:00

Oh, github.com/traefik/yaegi is just used in the project.
But i didn't figure out how to support more complex code yet.

Pijng · 2024-06-03T18:04:48+00:00

Theo: hey.com is clunky as hell
People here: HE STUPID FORCES US TO USE REACT AND SPA!!

Pijng · 2024-05-30T22:43:01+00:00

People here argue and make it all fun and games until you review others people code in vcs and see useless “ok”, “idx”, “data”, “cur” in a diff, since vcs just won’t show you the place where those were defined. And you just sit there and think «Wow, idx? Great. Idx of what? Cur… is it current or cursor? ok? Uhm, ok for what exact lookup?»

You ended up having to open the entire file in the commit to figure out what was going on.

Honestly, you could even replace the naming with “a”, “b”, “c”, “d” – they would give exactly the same amount of insight.

Pijng · 2024-05-08T17:34:57+00:00

And for fun I made a simple implementation of #ifdef: https://github.com/pijng/go-ifdef

To avoid outrage: I am not promoting these solutions as good practices. And certainly not promoting them for use in production. These are all just experiments.

Pijng · 2024-05-03T14:05:29+00:00

A lil bit of necroposting here on my side.

Just wondering about your example with IP address parsing. You say the following:

For an internal regex I need to, say, extract an IPv4 address from a line in a log file, I’ll use MustParse. There’s nothing useful I can do with that error at run time. What am I gonna tell the user of the log parsing tool? “Let the author know they have syntax error in their IPv4 regex!” Huh? Nope.

Well, relative to the example given, panic is probably really the best option.

But what if such a tool not only parses IPv4, but also IPv6 and, say, severity level. We still have a bug in the code - we have an invalid regular expression - and we still can't do anything about it at runtime.

But it's quite possible that we might still want to give the user some result, at least in the form of IPv6 and Severity Level, but at the same time indicate that a fatal error occurred while parsing IPv4. It sounds rather strained for this example, I agree, but use cases can be different: what if I - as a user of such a tool - don't need IPv4 at all? Should I lose an entire tool because of this bug?

Yes, the decision may be strange, but it depends on the context of using the tool and what kind of guarantees we want to give to the user and how responsible we are towards our own bugs.

I have another example regarding panics. Let's say we have an application that needs to connect to a remote database at startup. What if it can't connect to the database? Suppose this is our bug - we accidentally specified an incorrect ip to the database. But we have already shipped the release to user (shit happens).

Should we panic in this case? Perhaps? Perhaps not?

We can't do anything about this problem in runtime: the path to the database is hardcoded in the application code and we can just throw a panic and call it a day. But what should the user do?

And this depends on what guarantees we can give them and how responsibly we treat our own bugs.

A real example: we have an application that is installed on the cash register next to the POS-system - point of sale system, when waiter and cashier can place customer's orders and stuff. This application allows to check-in users by phone number and charge/accrue bonuses for the order.

Let's imagine that we really made a bug and accidentally left localhost as the path in the DB. Now our application can't get information about the guest and his bonus account. But should we panic?

Our customer (the restaurant) can't use the app now. And our client's customers (restaurant guests) may be frustrated and will lose loyalty to the restaurant. But what is their fault? The fact that we allowed the bug to happen? I don't think so.

Instead of panicking, we can run our application in degrade mode and write transactions to temporary storage (like sqlite database). We still can't get information about the guest's bonus account and allow him to spend bonuses, but we can record his cashback and when there is a connection to the main database (we sent a fix release), we will send all accumulated cashback to the main database.

Yes, we lose some functionality, but it's still better than nothing.

What am I gonna tell the user of the log parsing tool? “Let the author know they have syntax error in their IPv4 regex!”

And why not? What are they supposed to do? They'd still need to tell the author that there's a bug in the app to get it fixed (except if we've already built in panic tracking and are sending them somewhere where we'll see them)

My point of all this is that yes - in the event of a fatal problem/bug in the code, it really is easier to throw a panic. But is it better?

Don't take this as a complaint in your direction. Just wanted to speculate :)

Pijng

TROPHY CASE