Debian makes the deliberate choice to have older versions of software in the repository so that there is plenty of time to become aware of and fix any problems that come up. This is a reasonable stance to take, but in practice often newer software is stable enough, so Ubuntu essentially starts with Debian as a base and then adds newer version of software into the repository. This approach made it very popular, and as a result it effectively became a standard (in addition to RedHat/Fedora), which is significant because it means that a lot of software is now packaged to work best with Ubuntu. Both of these factors motivate many distributions to base themselves on Ubuntu. Unfortunately, Ubuntu also adds in a lot of stuff that... people disagree with, but the good news is that a distribution is just a collection of software, so there is nothing stopping someone from picking all of the parts of Ubuntu that they like, and leaving out all of the parts that they don't.

An init system is essentially infrastructure that runs underneath the hood to orchestrate what things get activated and when. Some people (not myself) consider systemd to be overly complicated so they prefer something that they consider to be simpler, and others oppose systemd on essentially ideological grounds for not being sufficiently "Unix-like". If you do not understand enough about init systems to understand the difference between these systems and their pros and cons, then I would highly recommend that you not care at all about what your init system is (outside of curiosity for its own sake), and be a little suspicious of distributions for which their init system is their main selling point compared to other distributions, because it probably means that they focus their time and energy on things that you have do not care about in practice. (Having said that, don't get me wrong: the great thing about Linux is that if someone really cares about this kind of thing, then they are completely free to tinker to their heart's content until it is exactly the way that they want it!)

Out of curiosity did your endocrinologist have any theories why this disruption between messaging and production was occurring?

I can't remember if she had a theory or not beyond what I said, only that the additional tests did not identify the cause as being something else going wrong that could be treated directly, leaving testosterone supplementation as the best option.

...though my personal recommendation is that you don't.

They're not assuming anything, they are doing calculus.

He sold his first software before it was even finished to his own unuversity.

What drives me crazy is when I hear this fact being cited as a positive thing that makes him a role model.

If it's explicitly consensual then it's not cheating because you are not breaking any understood rules of the relationship.

In particular, if one's testosterone level is low, then the next step is to see an endocrinologist. They will run an additional battery of tests to trace down exactly what is going wrong. In my case, they essentially concluded that my brain was sending out the correct signal, but it was not driving the correct response, so they prescribed a once a month injectable medication to supplement it directly.

No, if your testosterone level is low then it can definitely affect energy levels, so it is worth checking up on it. The "late night TV bullshit" only starts if the test says your testosterone is within the normal range for your age, but you decide to supplement it anyway.

We will as soon as Elon Musk turns Tesla around and earns his contractual trillion dollar payout as a reward!

I approve of not being legally insured if you use AI as part of any process related to making, interpreting, or communicating your policies.

As an IBM training manual from 1978 put quite aptly:

I was confused by their response too, but now it looks like they just accidentally clicked the reply button on the wrong comment.

Agreed, there will always be a turbofish in the sea.