[–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks. Been around the Linux block a few times. It's all the same kernel and user space for the most part. All anyone is really doing is make some choices about compiling the kernel, what packages they want to support and what package manager they want to use.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Nah Linux is about freedom. When you distro hop enough you'll see the differences between the major distros are mainly subjective. Nobara had a specific goal and they've done a really good job of achieving it so I got nothing but respect for that team. People get persnickety but that's just people being lame. I'm not personally married to any distro. Right now rocking Fedora but may switch back to arch when I get another machine or feel like doing a fresh install.

    Same deal for Zorin, not what I would personally run but I appreciate them. Then there's distros with a very specific use case like tails, puppy Linux, DSL, qubes, Nix, openWRT, and so on and they're great too. I have a puppy Linux and tails flashdrive.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 12 points 2 weeks ago

    All citizens have three votes. Their political vote, their financial vote (who they give their money to), and their life vote in how they behave, what that vocally support, if they protest, if they support a revolution or not. Every government today is the product of the third type of vote, people fighting in protest and revolution, often mortally to birth that government. It's our job as citizens to vote for the government and world we want.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

    Like Ubuntu 8.04, canonical with their attempts to make an apple inspired walled garden have mucked it all up. I want Debian but better but not with too much extra. Ubuntu was this ultimate nexus of Linux for a moment but now it's gone. Now Fedora is the runner up.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Can you link to any primary materials ideally from Marx outlining the use of the scientific method for political means? There's all sorts of a minority controlling a majority that aren't capitalistic, monarchy being the classic alongside dictatorships and oligarchies with varying economic structures.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

    The question will always be if policies from a different political philosophy or one not yet invented or otherwise canonized are more optimal. We shouldn't be enslaved by a particular way of thinking aka it is / isn't in this political philosophy therefore it will / will not work / be better

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    It's a live experiment. We're always going to be doing something and we will at least have data for that. Like Portugal's decriminalization of drugs has shown to be far more effective than the US war on drugs in decreasing drug use.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Things must be tough because consoles are typically sold at a loss. Then again with the current steam machine success not selling at cost maybe they are planning on trying the same?

  • source
  •  

    That is all policies and political structures are testable and tested to see their effect on those three (or other suggested) factors. If a policy doesn't reasonably work then it's simply not continually employed. I'm curious to see what factors others think ought to be used.

    It seems most political systems now were built without science in mind and utilize it as an afterthought to help develop legitimacy for policies individuals want. Generally politics across countries seems deeply emotionally driven and not fact driven. That is people have a feeling that an idea is a good idea and then they cobble together whatever they can to support that point without any unified measure of good or better. Ideally it ought to be the other way around, fact or evidence informed policy generation.

     

    The stardust is a given. As for sunlight, all the energy including somewhat arguably geothermal (using the suns gravity to help form the earth and I guess radioactive material being formed by other stars) comes from the sun and gets converted into chemical energy you eat so you're stardust animated by sunlight (mainly).

    view more: next ›