I'm inclined for the second one. It would be pretty big news if they fixed it. My hardware is not bad but it isn't great either. I usually get laptops from my workplaces so my personal laptop is kinda old.
Keep in mind that a lot of people use Linux exactly because they don't have good hardware specs.
I have installed Firefox in my machine and the difference is around 3 seconds.
For me, how my system feels is pretty important. If something isn't snappy, my stress levels start to rise. So those 3 seconds do make a difference. Some people might not care at all, which is understandable.
If you don't care, use it, enjoy it. You're free to pick what matches your priorities and preferences.
I use Ubuntu. I think it's funny how Arch users immediately assume they know more about Linux than me because of my distro choice. My hobby is learning about Linux and I can do that perfectly from my Ubuntu machine.
I've used Arch in the past, and let me tell you, nothing crazy is going on in there.
Yes, Ubuntu sucks because they are forcing Snaps on people while snaps are slow as hell. Thankfully they haven't fully shoved snaps down our throats. If they don't make snaps faster before shoving them down my throat, I'll just distro hop. Probably to Debian. I love Debian.
He's an asshole and his platform is definetely not 100% free speech. I'm just saying even assholes should have the right to moderate their platforms however they want, obviously in the framework of the law.
It's strange how seeing a man in a skirt or kilt feels so off. Like, my brain just fires an alert for some reason. It's just a freaking piece of cloth, wtf.
Isn't Twitter's free speech kinda the same as Fediverse or Reddit's free speech? Pretty sure if someone says something homophobic or transphobic in here, they'll get kicked out (which, for me, is good. Keep reading). It's free speech for the people that align with the admin ideals. I see nothing wrong with it besides the echo chamber effect, but at least people can create spaces where they feel safe.
Someone could argue "but Lemmy also has right wing instances". Then just imagine Twitter is a right wing instance of Mastodon that has been defederated. And that's what the free market is about. The free market is a fediverse and a company is an instance, you can create an instance and put whatever rules you want in it. It's up to everyone else if they want to use it or federate with it. Twitter just "defederated" Threads. How is that different from a Lemmy instance defederating other instances?
Is it against free speech when Lemmy admins kick right-wing people or defederated right-wing instances? I think it is against free speech, but I don't think everyone needs to allow free speech in their home. Go ahead and kick out the people you consider offensive. I believe Lemmy and private companies should have the right to do this.
I do agree, it's his company. He can create his own rules. I don't agree with his rules, so I don't use the service.
Only pure liberals think leaving the free market by itself with minimal regulation is a good thing. Capital attracts capital and becomes basically a snowball.
But is the solution a market controlled by a centralized entity? You just pointed out politicians can also be corrupted. So... Giving more power to an entity that can be corrupted is the solution?
The problem is corruption. Any system you can propose can be fucked up by corruption. The justice system, politicians and government can be corrupted under any system because they are human.
If I'm wrong, just propose any system and I'll tell you how it crumbles because of corruption.
I also think these corporations are evil, but complaining about everything they do just because it is an inconvenience for them? They should complain and act on the shit that matters.
I rode my bike exclusively on the hardest hills known in my city. Like hills that took 2h and had inclinations that would make it extremely hard to start if you stopped pedaling.
It took 40m