!nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
Not sure how much it applies to IRL genetics, but I learned through Blender Principled Hair shader and its official manual (yeah, I'm aware this is a very strange way to learn something related to genetics and biology, and may sound a lot like non-sequitur before the subject of the question) that the ratio between eumelanin and pheomelanin (which seems to plays a role in hair redness) for deep red hair is somewhere in-between (i.e. somewhere around 50% or more) a blonde hair and a black hair (which makes sense if we were to think about it: red hair is neither brighter as blonde hair, nor darker as brown/black hair, it's something in-between). I had to tinker with these values in order to conjure a character (specifically, Lilith, who is often seen/believed among ritualistic practitioners, including by myself, as red-haired) with a black-to-red hair.
Therefore having the exact balance needed for deep red hair to happen naturally seems mathematically/statistically rare (especially due to the biological dynamics between recessive vs dominant genes).
Also, (now talking about something outside 3D art, from more IRL-grounded observation) red-hairedness seems to be often present alongside zygomatic rubor/blush (as in, redder cheek, seen among e.g. some Irish people), likely due to the same genes which give the eumelanin-pheomelanin ratio to be closer to 50%.
Again, I'm not knowledgeable about the subject matter, I'm just sharing something I've observed from my whole neurodiverse hyperfocused perspective, an esoteric artist who've been doing art depicting Lilith in Her anthropomorphic manifestation as a powerful red-haired entity and have been pivoted to 3D art in Blender recently, and red-hairedness calls to my attention precisely because it reminds me of Lilith and how She often manifests during my gnosis.
Totally agree with your comment, I'd just make an observation to this specific part:
The problem with a new rendering engine is who have influence over the specs/standards, as well as who holds the necessary keys to be granted access to its features. We humans have been tying ourselves to centralized entities who pinky-swear they can guarantee "Safety/Security": SSL/TLS, HDCP and any other technologies gate-kept by "Divine Beholders" of the only keys able to "bless mere mortals" with the temporary grant required to develop using a technology. I mean, this is exactly what's happening to mobile apps, with "sideloading" having been a boogieman word for installing apps without having to rely on a centralized app store, a manufactured consent that worked so well that people and governments have been accepting, even relying on, Google's "Integrity Check" shenanigans (and the Apple's whatever analogue i-thing for iOS). The supply chain attacks that have been happening (from PyPi to AUR) feels like something that's further pushing us to more centralized "authorities" who'll then have absolute power over who can and who can't pass.
Even if a truly independent entity were to come up with a full-fledged browser engine, as compatible as possible with current specs, Google still seems to possess lots of influence on the official Web standards and they can simply commit changes to the specs that would uncirvumventably require Google's "blessing" to function (for your security, of course /s); so anything "not blessed" would simply fail to function because it isn't signed by the "blessing", "divine" keys.
And Mozilla doesn't feel trustworthy as well, especially because they're overly reliant on Google's money to exist, and also because they've been pivoting to opt-out (so one must explicitly disable it and confirm their will to disable it, otherwise it will be on by default, which turns to be a shady lack of consenting, much like Google's behavior) "features" much despite of their own userbase's demands.
This said, I used to believe in third-way projects such as Servo and Ladybird... except the latter went down a very unacceptable road (founder turned out to be a transphobe who dismisses using neuter pronouns and assumes the user's gender to be always a "he/him" because "we don't do politics here"), and the former... it belongs to Linux Foundation, where big corps such as Microsoft, Google and Oracle have their horses (after all, "Microsoft loves Linux"; sure, Nadella, we know how Microsoft "loves" Linux /s).
I'm afraid there's no light at the end of the fiber optics (pun intended) when it comes to alternative engines: either we try to actively boycott the "modern Web technologies" altogether (ditching HTTP(S) and pivoting to entire alternative protocols such as Geminiprotocol and Gopher whose standards/specs are slightly more distant from the dirty hands of "Google et al"; worth mentioning how Fediverse has Geminiprotocol-capable platforms such as tootik, it's more doable than reinventing the cursed wheel of the Web which turns to be the infamous Chromium wheel) or we try to stick with the "lesser evil" (forks of Mozilla Firefox, until Firefox becomes totally enshittifiedly indistinguishable from Chromium) until a solution happens (or likely not, then we're left with just the other path, which is pivoting to alternative standards altogether).