eochaid

I detest and call out shitty behavior know matter what political alignment a person may hold. It's called a moral compass. Is this a new concept to you?

And the we I'm refering to is really Lemmy, not necessarily democrats/liberals

What's truly not surprising is Sony fanboys defending the benefits of exclusives up until Xbox has an exclusive they want.

Lol, Starfield was originally going to be a Sony exclusive. That means Sony was literally going to pay Beth money to deny Xbox gamers access.

MS just made the better offer.

To save money, maybe you should eat the rich.

Stop. Don't be an incel.

You want to make fun of her, make fun of her for being a moron, a hypocrite, and a fascist. Making fun of a woman for showing public affection is just gross and we should be better than that.

Look, Lauren Boebert gives us enough to make fun of without having to resort to this schoolyard bullshit. It's pretty cringe to make fun of a woman for having an active and healthy sex life.

Oh duh, you're absolutely right, I forgot about the oft used configuration option of "sudo fuck my boot loader = enabled"

If linuxmemes thinks this meme is humor, it explains a lot.

Look I'm not going to defend windows or Microsoft. Personally I doubt its useful at all but it doesn't really matter. A broken dependency is a broken dependency.

Even if it's a pet project from a bing exec that's completely unnecessary - if removing it will break things, an os geared towards a general public should prevent it from being removed.

Did I say I was defending MS' restrictions on Edge? No. I think it's dumb, but not for the reason you think.

MS prevents you from uninstalling edge because for some stupid reason a bunch of system processes and their store all require and use edge as a dependency. Removing edge would actually break a lot of things in windows. Is it stupid? Absolutely. But the reason they don't want to do that is because MS implements a lot of restrictions like this to prevent their end users from breaking windows with stupid mistakes.

But this meme isn't about allowing people to removing edge. Its trying to flex on the capabilities of linux vs. windows but using the laziest smooth brained way to do that. There are a lot of benefits to linux over windows. But the ability to sudo fuck your bootloader isn't one of them.

And it's not even that great of a flex too. "My OS lets me sudo commands that will break my system." Great, so your system lets you accidentally break the system with a fat finger mistake? Why would I want that?

Windows is geared towards a general audience that includes some of the dumbest and least technically literate people to ever walk the earth. And they have to support it. Of course they're going to limit your permissions.

The word you're looking for is "regulation".

Capitalism's only job is to be a paper clip factory. All they will ever care about is making paper clips. If left unchecked, they will run amok and fill the universe with paper clips.

It's government's job to provide the walls and the rules and the guidelines that protect its people and prevent that from happening.

But the paper clip factory managers started running for office. And duped people into voting for them. And now the halls of congress and governor mansions and parliments and white houses etc. are filled with paper clips and now nobody can get anything done.

I think you're confusing socialism with communism.

Most western nations use some hybrid of capitalism and socialism. Pure capitalism doesn't work. Pure socialism doesn't work. But together they check and balance each other.

The only debate is around "how capitalist" or "how socialist".

For example, the industry that provides internet access is an example of where capitalism has failed. We gave them an unfettered free market and they wrote their government contracts to give themselves fiefdoms and consolidated to the point that there is no competition. This is the endpoint of pure capitalism - feudalism.

The "pure capitalist" approach would be to throw up your hands and give up. The free market has spoken.

Hybrid approach #1 could be to use government regulations to break up the fiefdoms and somehow force competition. This is still a hybrid approach, but closer to the capitalist side of the spectrum.

Hybrid approach #2 would be to acknowledge that a competitive landscape may never develop over such a required piece of infrastructure and instead turn the industry into a public utility. This is much closer to the "socialism" side of the fence as they may still allow private companies to run the utility, but the government controls many parts of their business practices.

The pure socialist approach would be to have the government take over internet infrastructure and provide it as a public good paid by tax dollars. Which has its own pros and cons I suppose. The government running internet infrastructure is a bit of a black box - we don't really know how it'd go - but its hard to imagine the pace of innovation and support being worse than it is today.

Regardless, this only applies to an industry that currently lacks innovation. There are plenty of industries where a free market does work in the public's favor. But not all of them. And that's something the hybrid model acknowledges.