glad someone said it: thats the actual historical term this headline reminded me of immediately
lol have you ever tried to use windows baked-in support or MS forums with "expert answers"?
And low-powered doesnt even make sense, there is less bloat and bing/copilot shit dragging the system down, my system on the exact same specs and drive boots into Linux in like 1/10 the time as windows.
As for useful software packages, services like Flatpak, snap, and deb are a breeze -and not being able to use enshittified adobe software instead of their now better free and open source alternatives is ridiculous - Linux on any distro is what most developers would prefer and browsing is exactly the same. Hell, even gaming which was peoples major "missing piece" has made leaps and bounds last year alone.
thats a fun example and and all, but what situation does "MyAssMy$1" arise from? 😳
I agree with intentionally provocational speech hiding behind the 'free speech' disguise being stupid, but I think its also important to see a difference between racial slurs and discrimination based on things that people can't change, versus legitimate criticism of religion - which, although not always easy to get out of (I.e. cults, trapped family members, cultural norms) I see as still a fundamentally voluntary behaviour that you can to an extent opt out of as a belief system, as opposed to discrimination on race, sex, disability, nationality, etc.
Now of course that doesnt mean I will go into religious buildings and shout obscenities or try to have edgy atheist rants at inoffensive elderly worshippers - but the saying that "your freedom ends where mine begins" holds true for me, and I won't tolerate outward discrimination on religious grounds, the forcing of those belief systems inside secular systems like schools or courts or governments, and I think I'm well within my rights to criticise harmful and unacceptable behaviour undertaken for 'religious' grounds, which would otherwise be crimes or offences. (I.e. animal torture/sacrifice, child marriage, slavery etc.)
France and colonialism need to be studied and their past mistakes interrogated, but being a dipshit apologist for fundamentalist extremist subhumans is substantially worse, because its happening now, and you actually know better.
Any comments on the kefalah system or insight into how Islam spread around the middle east? (hint: it was also colonialism dummy, just a kind you seem to think is acceptable as opposed to France's) Interestingly the racist colonisers stopped using capital punishment, albeit way too recently still, but they're not still fucking crucifying people like fucking savages for aposty.
Supporters of ignorant turds that can't handle a secular state's media's fundamental right to satirise a pedophile cult leader from 500 years ago should go retreat to the shadows from where they came. You might believe immensely in your god or prophet, but they dont exist in the reality of other people better educated, more inquisitive, or more fortunate not to be brainwashed into that belief by birth or oppression. Killing people who dont share your favourite religious text is stone age behaviour and the mark of an animal, not a human being.
Dont you dare pollute the legitimately necessary discourse about historical wrongdoings in the world with justifications of terrorism because you never opened more than one book before.
Celebrating people that reduced themselves and their community to barbarism because they couldn't mind their own fucking business in a multicultural society is pathetic and you should aspire to be better than that before someone tricks you into doing something stupid and dangerous.
it's for pixel phones only.
I absolutely agree that the modern internet has been turned into a corporate rage-bait hellscape, but do keep in mind that every generation that's ever lived feels that their childhood was better and safer than what exists today. It's human nature to prefer our fondest memories at our most carefree point in life - but although ipad babies are a scourge that terrify me, it's important to remember that children aren't all drooling fortnight zombies these days either.
The networks that do the most damage were specifically engineered that way due to the profit motive rewarding engagement of all sorts above positive connection. Social media is the problem, but it's only that way because of the economic and commercial factors involved. Individuals can always be assholes, but nobody has miserable memories of myspace and MSN online as genocide-facilitating false news propagators, because they weren't specifically designed to make people angry and breathlessly message everyone they know about a perceived problem.
Social media has the capacity to connect disparate groups of people, become a forum for interests, and open the world up to new perspectives and information - the intentional monopolisation of that promise by frankly, evil, multinationals is the root cause of the issue - not the technology itself.
Australia's new law will do fucking nothing, and as many experts have suggested, will probably make the issues worse. Bullying isn't limited to social media, so a child that previously found refuge by connecting with like-minded friends elsewhere or staying in touch when living remote, now gets to be 'saved' by being kicked off the platform and left with only the real-life bullying they endure at school. Counterproductive.
Additionally, if the platforms are such violent cesspools for children, why is it then acceptable for them to continue with their perverse rage-bait designs, so long as the user is over 16? The government should instead be regulating the mechanics and algorithms of the sites to make them safer, more reasonable and positive entities - rather than just giving up on any meaningful regulation and saying that meta is fine, because a 17 year old can get bullied in person instead of a 35 year old having revenge porn posted of them, or a 72 year old falling down a facebook conspiracy rabbit hole is a-ok.
This legislation was half-baked, forced through with little-to-no debate, stands to worsen the stranglehold of monopolised tech. It places the responsibility of parenting onto facebook, twitter, etc. which are the last entities in the damn world that should get to define 'safety' or police responsible usage. It does absolutely nothing to address the serious fundamental problems that pervade our modern, highly concentrated technology ecosystems, and actually gives them a free pass to allow the sites to fester even more (bringing in more profit as people doom-scroll longer, viewing more ads, when their specific fears and annoyances are deliberately tabulated and curated to make them as angry, paranoid, isolated, unhappy, and antagonistic as possible) by saying that it's a foregone conclusion that social media is evil, and we can't fix that, so why even try? /s
If they actually wanted to fix this problem, investing in education and help resources, probing into the design and function of these sites would be the way to do it. We've just scored a massive own goal at Zuckerberg, et. al's benefit, by asking them to police themselves and sacrificing everyone over the age of 16 to the hellscape of media as it is, instead of as it could be.
don't worry, Im a native speaker and I also have no idea...
I mean, there's no singular reason for Kamala's loss - but abstentions over the middle east were still a reasonably noteworthy problem for the campaign.
With that being said.... more broadly, people are just generally awful and a lot of people bury their heads in the sand rather than acknowledging how backwards the majority really are.
all active Linux development is appreciated - the ideals of a FOSS operating system perfectly compliment the market for Proton services.
I chose proton, in part because of their first-party Linux support, and I look forward to the app continuing to be even better!
exactly the sketch I thought of when I saw this post!