I guess that 4% market share is because it's just so good. The Linux community couldn't even pull that off without a multi-billion dollar corporation helping them with software compatibility and stability.
Feel free to keep making fun of Windows though -- I haven't made an operating system part of my personality so it doesn't upset me in the slightest.
Drivers are still a shit show. The drivers in question have changed, but there's still extremely common hardware with poor support. I know this is the hardware vendors fault but that doesn't change my experience as a user -- I need my hardware to work.
It's still extremely fragmented. Yes, this is often a good thing because it let's you pick the features you want but I'm not interested in comparing and configuring 14 different tiling window managers.
It's still fragile outside of the terminal. I constantly see posts and comments about peoples OS becoming unbootable or show stopping issues they just can't fix without hopping to another distro or nuking their install from orbit. The 18th most popular distro seems to be popular simply because it makes it easy to roll back fucked updates or sidegrades.
This stuff might be fine for people who love to tinker but I can't afford to have my PC shit the bed when I need it for work and I'm not interested in having "chill and play some games" involuntarily replaced with "fix the bootloader".
And I can't help but feel like the "anybody who isn't sucking off Linux must be bait" mentality ensures this is a pit the scene will never escape from.
There's absolutely no chance you haven't seen the posts describing these problems. You're commenting on one right now
Exactly. Those "get out of murder free" moments can come and go in an instant. You don't have time to be fucking around with a gun safe when your doorbell rings or a car pulls into your driveway.
It should be noted that for-profit media companies will play dumb on any protest critical of the types of people that own and run for-profit media companies.
During the "occupy" protests, it was common to see reporters staring into the camera and asking "but what are these protests about?" in front signs stating exactly what the protests were about. They knew if they fairly reported on the movement, their audience might start agreeing with the protesters. So both "left wing" and "right wing" media companies held hands and united to undermine it.
But without that reporting, fuck knows. If he's posting on reddit conspiracy subs, they've become a place for extremists to recruit the stupid and the clinically paranoid.
It genuinely could be completely irrelevant. Was he suffering a psychotic episode during the attack?
By saying "he stabbed people because he's schizophrenic", you're grouping millions of innocent people in with a murderer in a way that is no more fair than the far-right scum who immediately say "I bet he's a Muslim".
Not only does that discourage people from seeking help and turn them into pariahs, it contributes functionally nothing to our understanding of why this happened because not all mentally ill people are violent and not all violent people are mentally ill.
Thanks for sharing your special snowflake status with us but generalizing groups of people is the only way to discuss them and I'm not going to let pro-gun bullshit slide just because I haven't kissed every gun owner on the mouth.
The lobby groups, politicians and online communities that represent you do not agree that "some people should not own firearms", with some of them even advocating guns for felons. It's the fairest possible generalization I can make.
If you don't want to be associated with that, take it up with them. Hell, send me the link as proof that you actually mean it, instead of it being hollow, worthless virtue signalling designed to derail arguments.
They were asked how gun laws could be improved after a teenager, who people called "school shooter" because of his history of rape threats and animal abuse, bought 2 semi-automatic rifles from a gun company that targets edgelords and used them to mutilate a room of children beyond recognition. Their response was "make them even more permissive".
If they they oppose denying firearms to someone with that many red flags, they're definitely not going support denying firearms to someone for being old, unable to control their emotions and probably racist.
Seems like plenty of context to me. The CSIRO invented something that changed the world, back before neoliberals cut their funding.