There are probably edge cases and you might not know about them until you actually run into them by running a script or similar but then it is to late as people dont want things to break. There is 30 years of testing, and expected behavior, behind on what we have today.

Botjacketing is dehumanization

If the tools are actually incompatible, you can always go back to the old tools. They’re in another package.

So the change brings real incompatibility in excange for potential safety?

Because rust is inherently memory safe, so these utilities will be less likely to have hidden memory errors that could cause security issues.

What part of changing working, tested and very stable utilities with semi-compatible unstable ones is pretty good?

Don't call me Shirley, though

I agree.

But, staying silent when influential figures make extreme statements isn't neutrality, it's acceptance. Passively enduring these shifts in public discourse is exactly how extreme ideas become normalized.

I'm always open to discussing

Not really imo

There's an unofficial Teams flatpak or just use web. I use Thundebird for Outlook. For some reason Outlook refuses to work on my Firefox, so I use Vivaldi for that too. OneDrive is fucked, but there is an Rclone integration if you can convince your workplace to give you the correct API permissions. I have unfortunately not.

So, you've demonstarted nothing and all your points were refuted. Then you've made up a list with checkmarks and proudly proclamed yourself right? 😮‍💨

Generally I think when Ubuntu makes big moves, they’re pretty bad, but these rust reimplementations are actually pretty good. Good job, Canonical.

That's not true at all

Let's not divide people more than they already are. Picking arbitrary battles is not the path to happiness

Really informative. Thank you!

No part of my argument hinges on ZFS code being good quality. My argument is that ZFS code is desirable.

the tool doesn't matter, the result does.

The argument "the method doesn't matter, only results" has been the source of so many ethics and academic violations. You saying that with a straight face says enough about you. Bye.

I've used the web version of teams. Is the wrapper any different?

If they stop donating to DHH and Omarchy sure I guess.

and its code is... well, it's not bad, so let's quantify it as good, or good enough

If "good enough" isn't actually good enough, why are you calling it that? Your entire argument hinges on high code quality not being high code quality. Like... yeah, of course bad code is going to lead to bad outcomes. That's literally the entire point he's trying to make: the tool doesn't matter, the result does.

Yes, they are deterministic. LLMs are not.

Thanks for correcting. But overall the trend rapidly goes upwards year by year for china.

The more general argument would be that you can't blame an individual for systemic ills, which has been done to death for climate change and tried to turn it into personal responsibility. We do not live in true democracies but capitalist societies. And we can't be expected to "opt out of the system". If something could be implemented in a way that is ethical but isn't because the ruling plutocrats make more profit that way, this is not the individuals fault. This demonization of people for using AI is unethical and a strategic blunder in a fight for liberation and ultimately only serves to shield specifically neoliberal capitalism from critique.

Ok so we'll have to go over a few points then.

• If you consider that calling Israel fascists or genocidal is "throwing labels", then eitther you have no clue what these words mean, or you are supporting Israel. They are, factually, fascists currently committing genocide. Calling them nazis is just a quick and dirty way to point it out, because in the end there is little difference in the ideologies and methods.

• If a venue is obstructing free speech in an illicit way, then Ed Sheeran could have sued them. He didn't, followed along, and then made a statement that plays in the hands of the fascist genocidal government. Which makes him guilty by association.

• Supporting criminal things is not free speech. Just like he wouldn't (in theory) be allowed to say that hitler was right, he shouldn't be able to defend Israel. That's out of the bounds of free speech.

• Not making a strong stand on some things is, definitely and without a doubt, something that can deserve getting "beat up for". If I ask you what your stand of rape is, and your answer is "I think it's hard for both sides", then you are a piece of shit. The idea that everyone can just have whatever opinion they want is already not a good one ; the idea that everyone should be able to say whatever they want is absurdely stupid.

You dared criticize my stance, but yours is just a wishy-washy "we should let everyone do whatever they want" which totally has been working in the world up this point, considering what the world became.

I didn’t realize businesses used Linux. Every place I’ve worked it’s been windows and Chrome/Edge.

Oh so you’re used to getting dunked on. Good to know.