That’s fair. My camera (Nikon D300) is from 2007 but it functions wonderfully and the auto settings are usually very good, with me only having to adjust the exposure or white balance occasionally.

Anyone who tells you to manually set everything in photography is silly. I took a photography class and made sure to thoroughly read a professional photographer’s breakdown of my camera and how to operate it.

The only reason I’ve seen suggested why you should use manual mode is if you want a very specific shot that the automatic settings won’t allow you to get. You know, like everything else. Automatic modes (i.e. aperture modes mainly) are there for a reason and while it’s good to know how to manually set your parameters and read the light meter, you realistically don’t want to be fiddling with your camera while whatever subject you want to photograph is potentially changing (for portrait or still shots its not as bad, but if you need to do any form of quick shooting you’re only hampering yourself). Do I still use manual mode sometimes? Of course! I was taught how to use it and when I need it it is extremely helpful. But I typically only need it for night photography or if I want a specific effect (which can often be achieved with shutter mode but I never really use that).

Well we’re kinda on track to undo start both of those things so…

Nobody in the world does that.

The Swiss do, which is where our gun laws originate from. The founding fathers were trying to emulate Swiss gun laws and culture, but they only really managed to solidify the laws not the culture. I’m not saying the founding fathers are the end all be all of legal interpretation, but I don’t think they missed with trying to emulate the Swiss here.

Why do you need guns in schools?

Same reason i think we should bring back shop classes, auto classes, home economics, and stuff like that. There are practical skills that are useful to learn that kids should be given the option to explore. Acting like firearms have no purpose, use, or value is silly. And it gives a good and dedicated space to learn how to use them safely, just like other tools should and did have, and just like guns used to have. Shooting classes in schools are not a novel idea and were actually common at point. Sure, in a coty it might not be the most useful but the majority of the population doesn’t live in cities.

Just make guns act like cars, if it’s fine one way, it’s fine the other too.

I don’t actually think the way we handle cars is fine, it’s actually quite fucked. But my issue is mainly with how we view and treat cars, which is a cultural issue. I have the same gripe with firearms, hence why I suggest reforms that target changing gun culture.

Putting restrictions instead of giving guns away like you’re Brian from Family Guy trying to buy a carton of milk in Texas will drastically reduce the number of people who even want one.

No, changing the way we view and frame firearms as a society will. People often want guns because they either have a legitimate need or because it makes them feel strong/tough/cool/secure in their identity. Adding restrictions mainly hurts the former, while the latter will still go to obtain them but with less oversight and control. The way to actually address the second group is with cultural changes on the perception of firearms. Again, we should look to Swiss gun culture for this.

The government should just mandate that, to own a firearm, you need a license.

In most places you do. The places you don’t are mainly Texas. I’m not arguing we become Texas. If you want to own a firearm in most states you need a Firearm Owner’s ID. If you want to carry your firearm you usually need a Concealed Carry License. This is not what I take issue with. However if this were extended to a firearm owner’s registry, I would take issue with that for the same reasons I take issue with forming registries of people who have done nothing wrong.

Then you have to renew every two years or how long it is, pass a medical exam and on you go.

This won’t work for the same reason it doesn’t currently work with cars.

If you get caught intoxicated while holding or near an unsafe firearm, your license is taken away from you, with all your firearms, for a period of time, or permanently for repeat offenses, like with cars.

You really, really don’t see how this can go wrong do you? I understand the sentiment and agree with what you want to accomplish with this, but this is rife for abuse. And not theoretical abuse, but the exact same type of abuse that has been used to incarcerate a lot of black and brown people in the US. It also is somewhat antithetical to the point of citizens being able to possess firearms if the government can just waltz in and take them away.

If it’s too much of a hassle to own one, most people will just do without.

No because like drugs and prostitution people will just find another way. Legalize all of those things because the way to address those issues is with safety regulation and cultural shifts.

Sure, I can agree with that. But the amount of police corruption is also quite high in Australia. Not saying the US doesn’t have that, but it’s a lot of the same issues just without guns. I mean look at FriendlyJordies getting firebombed for whistleblowing on politicians.

In Paris and Rome most of the police don’t have automatic rifles.

And I think plenty of people would tell and show you exactly why you need a gun in NYC.

America has a lot of government overreach too, don’t get me wrong. I’m just saying that American gun laws were originally meant to be modeled after Swiss gun laws and if we had also adopted Swiss gun culture we wouldn’t have the problems we do today.

Fair, i certainly couldve used better wording

I’m of the opinion that a lot of gun control is ineffective, especially given what guns are supposed to mean. Yes places like Australia have been extremely successful in removing guns, but also look at their policing system and governmental overreach which is honestly quite terrible. I’m of the opinion that the most effective gun control is changing the culture surrounding guns. Bring back (optional) shooting classes in schools, teach kids (and adults) gun safety and actual useful knowledge about firearms. Regulate the access, storage, and use of ammunition. Change the culture from people thinking they’ll be John Wick once they get their glock to people who actually understand that firearms are tools that can be used as weapons, and that they require time, effort, training, and a lot of responsibility to use safely. The cat is out of the bag in the US; guns aren’t going away. Acting like we can remove them is silly, but we can change the perception around them.

I also think we need similar movements for a lot of things, like cars.

I agree with you but that doesn’t mean everyone does. Whether you like it or not, social media platforms are going to be used. OP is just sharing a tool they built and believe may be useful to others for free. There’s no need to shit on their work just because you ideologically disagree with the underlying services managed. Again, I feel the same way as you but OP is contributing a useful tool to the people; that is seldom a bad thing. I could see myself using this to boost my LinkedIn presence, because it’s one of the few things I have and need in my early career. Would I like to get rid of my LinkedIn? Absolutely. Do I despise most social media platforms (including Lemmy to a degree)? Definitely. Do I appreciate OP for making and sharing this? You bet I do.

Security is a give and take, and with bleeding edge you have to balance it more. Yes bleeding edge can mean bleeding hearts when a security issue is discovered in new code. But just as often, if not more frequently, it also means you get security patches before almost anyone else. And the AUR is insecure, as it’s a user repository. But 99% of the time if you read the PKGBUILD (it’s really easy, you can usually skim it) and check the sources you’ll be fine. The AUR being insecure isn’t bad, it just means you need to put more effort into checking on stuff and you need to be responsible for your security. These aren’t bad habits to have in general, but it’s a bit of a learning curve coming from systems that expect to handle most of your security for you.

I think it’s important to keep in mind here that there is a very marked difference between vanilla Arch and its derivatives. A lot of derivatives will set up a lot of base system software with sensible defaults, whereas with vanilla Arch it’s often up to you to find out that you need that software, and then you also need to figure out a lot of configuration. Not having to do that saves you from a lot of issues.

That is a very reasonable point. I don’t have a solution to that sadly.

Read the edit. I never advocated for public roads being used for cars. I acknowledge that the frustration against cars is reasonable. But if you simply can’t enjoy a fast and loud car in the appropriate setting, then that’s a you problem and not a me problem. You’re absolutely right that the appropriate setting is a track or out in the middle of nowhere, not residential or even commercial streets. But cars absolutely can be enjoyable in the right setting.

I’m not arguing against that last point at all. See the edit for my stance. I’m not trying to tone police — people are understandably and justifiably angry about the prevalence of cars as am I. But there seems to be a common undercurrent in this community that cars are just the pinnacle of evil and their existence must end. I’m just pushing against that because while I would love if cars weren’t used in my city, I’d still like for there to be a track to enjoy these marvels of engineering.

That argument wasn’t to justify their prevalence, but moreso that refusing to acknowledge it won’t get us anywhere. See edit for more info

See the edit to the post. I’m not advocating for cars everywhere. But people in this community seem to believe that cars simply shouldn’t exist.

Twinkies are horrible for you and evidence of the sin of capitalism, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t tasty and nice as an occasional treat. If capitalism didn’t exist they probably wouldn’t exist, but I’d still make Twinkies if we had star trek replicators.

I’m not saying don’t restrict cars to the track, I’m actually all for that. I’m just saying that cars can be fun and acting like they aren’t won’t get us anywhere. I didn’t advocate for continuous car infrastructure anywhere in my post, just that people in this community act like cars are the bane of all evil and can’t be used for fun whatsoever.

I just haven’t gotten around to setting it up is all.

I am also trying to degoogle/debigdata my life, but it seems we’re taking radically different approaches to it. I wish you luck in your journey!