Oh shit. Nobody tell congress or else they’re gonna ban linux

On the hardware level, it will take a while. In the software level, I don’t think it will ever happen.

I’m no computer engineer, but this seems like a silly take. Hardware requires supply chains and some of the most closely guarded technology in the world. Software requires programmers and time.

the Linux Kernel, the GNU stuff, the systemd stuff, the Freedesktop specifications, Xorg if they still use it, wayland protocols and wlroots, are all developed by people from The West,

Literally anyone can download those things and fork them. And I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s already chinese contributors. And if China really wanted, they could even ignore the GPL and not publish their changes to the source code 😲

Not everyone can download extreme UV lithography.

Because of propaganda, people find it easier to imagine the end of the world before the end of capitalism. Just the same, theres lots of commenters here that could imagine the end of the internet before they imagine the end of advertising on the internet.

Pay executives less. Focus on grants and PBS-style ‘underwriting’. Subscription services like email and VPN.

Getting into advertising is just jumping into an intractable conflict of interest.

This. (although I follow the directions here, which is a little more than apt install). The only thing I couldn’t get on Debian stable is the latest gnome. But when I tried debian testing, it was slightly broken anyway. And gnome extensions could get most of the functionality missing in my older gnome version. Debian stable + flatpak + anaconda + adding repositories (like for firefox) is a perfect compromise.

What’s nice about a stable distro is you can update the things you want to update, and your OS isn’t constantly changing a million packages a week that you don’t even know the function of.

Gotta wonder how many state actors have been using it for years.

Yes! The whole “lawyers are evil money grabbers” is a corporate psy-op. They want you to think it’s unreasonable for a person to sue a corporation when the corporation’s actions are harmful. They also want you to think defense attorneys are people who just look for technicalities to free guilty people.

They created armies of lawyers for themselves, while making americans distrustful of the ones fighting for normal people. We used to think of lawyers like Atticus Finch or Perry Mason. But now we just think of Saul Goodman and Lionel Hutz.

Oh right, sometimes I forget people have computers other than old thinkpads

IDK if thats true in 2024. Debian 12 isn’t much harder to setup than mint or Ubuntu, and the version of gnome it ships with is perfectly fine. I’m not a beginner anymore, so maybe there’s something I glossed over.

Oh wait, I just remembered the thing I glossed over. Needing to install sudo would definitely throw a beginner for a loop. (Iirc, you only need to do that if you give a root password during install). And that’s the problem with trying to learn Linux. Someone will tell you the thing is easy, but they forgot about some arcane step

Open camera is the best

Do they view LEED as something political? Or do they view LEED as something clients want? I think it’s the latter

architects, looking up from their NEOM designs: No, I don’t think I will

That Germany, of all countries, could fail to prevent a surge in reactionary antidemocratic politics suggests **there’s something eternal and enduring about the reactionary spirit. **

LMAO. Reactionary antidemocratic politics in Germany?!🧐 I’m shocked

Idk if it can be called a smartwatch, but I just found out about the sensor watch, and now I really want one. Basically a hackable Casio f-91w

From the game, UK or Florida?

Radar.weather.gov is so based

The article is a worth a read, answers the question in the first couple paragraphs, and isn’t a site flooded with ads. You’re just saving people from learning more than the answer to the headline

Well There’s your problem just did an episode on that https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K4yCXIZ32lk

They take getting caught seriously, not the stuff they get caught at.

Wut. I’m not sure if this is a distinction without a difference, or a subtle distinction that I need a better grasp on continental philosophy to comprehend.

It’s like saying a state doesn’t take murder seriously - they take getting caught seriously. It’s technically true if you parse it a certain way, but ultimately meaningless

this kind of thing is not bad because it endangered people’s lives, it’s bad because it makes them look bad and might impact their exports

Something can be bad for multiple reasons. Also, there’s multiple actors here. The operators of the state-owned enterprise have different incentives than the regulators

deleted by creator