Kethal
I used Debian for a bit many years ago. It was great for all the reasons you are tired of Arch (I had tried Gentoo before Debian). When Ubuntu came out, I was quite happy with it. It had the stability of Debian, but was a bit more polished and had better support for new stuff without sacrificing stability.
I'm moving on from Ubuntu at this point, and have tried Mint, but not Mint Debian. It's nice enough. I'm curious what Debian is like these days though. I haven't used it in a decade at least.
Snaps are ways to ship software where everything is bundled together and the developer doesn't need to sort out dependencies on the distribution. This often makes the package bloated. It has no direct benefits for users, but it makes life easier for developers. Thus, indirectly, users might get access to some software they would otherwise need to compile if no one's got it readily available for the user's distribution. Ubuntu appears mostly to be using it because they don't want to bother sorting out dependcies. On Ubuntu, and only on Ubuntu as fast as I know, some packages in apt will install the snap version silently, which, I think rightfully, annoys a lot of users.
There are similar alternatives, like flatpak, which also bundle dependencies. Some aspects of snap are proprietary to Canonical, the makers of Ubuntu, so you'll find people who are ok with the somewhat bloated software if it makes software more widely available, but aren't happy with a proprietary format in what is largely an open community.
I believe snaps are only installed by default on Ubuntu at this point. Debian has apt and I don't think it installs a snap version unless you asked for that.
Ok, so the gist of this that I'm getting is that there is an genuinely open RCS standard, but no one has implemented it. Instead, Google has their thing that's been modified for their benefit at the expense of consumer privacy, and that Apple seems to be making their own similar version. So RCS itself isn't bad, but it's being ruined by bad actors, and as of yet there are no good actors.
Shitting on a company's shit pay strucute is reasonable, but you can't ignore that this is always a choice between other options. Google and Apple are at least as bad in that regard, and they're worse in other ways. Steps in the right direction are better than not doing anything because there's no perfect option. When you do that, things get worse, because the companies will force you to take steps the wrong way.
I asked this in another RCS thread but didn't get a conclusive answer. My understanding is that RCS, although there are claims that it's an open standard, is essentially controlled by Google. Looking this is up doesn't lead me far. Most articles just say that SMS sends blurry videos and that RCS is better at that. They don't discuss who develops RCS or how it works. Am I wrong, is it really open? SMS has serious flaws, but a corporporate controlled "standard" is even worse in my mind.
Thanks. The history of it makes the current system a bit clearer.
Restriction enzymes cut at specific sequences, and although there are lots of variations, this limits where the new material can be inserted. CRISPR can match an arbitrary sequence, so there is much more control over where changes are made.
Do you know why the laws generally prohibit direct-to-consumer sales or why Wyoming has such odd exceptions?
If you're up for a lot more work, you can skim coat the drywall to remove the texture. It's takes a good bit of time and you'll need to sand so there's a lot of dust. I doubt it's the way you go unless you don't like the texture, but it's an option.
It's completely fine for me on FF mobile.