Cycling isn't legitimate transportation...apparently
shikitohno @ shikitohno @lemm.ee Posts 0Comments 213Joined 1 yr. ago
shikitohno @ shikitohno @lemm.ee
Posts
0
Comments
213
Joined
1 yr. ago
Stroll absolutely has his flashes of brilliance, but he's up against the double whammy of otherwise being a mediocre to disappointing driver occupying his seat on his father's dime rather than his merit, along with punctuating his bouts of mediocrity with absolutely stupid moves much more often than brilliant drives. Unless he really turns things around in a major way before he retires, I doubt he's ever going to get to enjoy any broad popularity or acclaim.
the will to learn about the topic
I think this is the bigger issue, to be honest. Like your example of environmental variables, it's not a complicated concept, but when a guide says to set the variable for Editor rather than a context menu asking you to choose the default program to open this type of file in the future, all of a sudden, people lose their minds about how complicated it is.
Comparing uncloging -manually pushing and pull a bar- or chaning a light -turn left, change, then right- or a breaker -literally just pulling a tab up- are WAY simpler actions. Yes, running apt upgrade is easy, but how you know is all well? That it work? + if I run apt update everyday I see almost no diference in my system, why should I even do something like that
These examples don't make sense to me as a point against using the terminal, especially since GUI package managers are a thing these days. Many upgrades are under the hood, so to speak, and don't produce visible changes for most users, and this applies just as much to other operating systems as it does to Linux. When Windows finishes upgrading and reboots, or Chrome tells a user updates are available, and they restart it, how do they know all is good? For the most part, they take it as a given that all is good as long as there's no new, undesired behavior that starts after the upgrade.
Just because I haven't been exploited by a security vulnerability or encountered a particular bug is no reason to remain on a version of my OS or programs that is still liable to either of them. That's just a bizarre argument against staying up to date.
It's pretty unreasonable to expect people to know all the intricacies of their OS unless it's their job, but I do think people could stand to treat their computer less like an unknowable magic box when they need to work with it and take a few minutes to try any basic troubleshooting at all. An example of the sort of thing I'm talking about, last year, my fan stopped working nearly as well and began making crazy amounts of noise. Could I explain to you how the motor in my fan works? Absolutely not. But I unplugged it, looked up how to disassemble it and got out my screwdrivers and opened it up to see if there was anything that I could see wrong with it. Turns out there was a lot of hair wrapped around a shaft and the base of the blades that built up over the years I've had it, and removing that and reassembling it was all it took to get it working fine again.
Plenty of people don't want to put in even that small amount of time and effort to understand things when it comes to computers, which is also a valid choice of its own, but they tend to annoy me when they attribute being unable to do something to the system being too complicated to understand/use, rather than owning their decision to focus their time and energy elsewhere. There are absolutely complex programs that are not accessible for non-tech people on Linux or the BSDs, but the same could be said for Windows and Mac. In the case of the other two, people just choose the option that works for them, but with Linux, they decide ahead of time that Linux is tough and complicated and don't even try. It could be something as simple as they want to install Debian and need non-free firmware to use their wireless card, there are people who will declare this to complicated to understand and discard the idea of using an OS entirely over a question that can be resolved in less than 5 minutes with a quick search and nano, all because "Oh, I'm not a computer person, it says terminal."
I think you just underestimate how awful public transport is in the US. Beating what's available here is not a high bar to clear, especially when it's nonexistent in many places. It can also vary pretty widely across and within regions. I imagine public transport in London is a different beast from public transport in Manchester, for example.
When I was visiting Manchester in March, it was pretty great. I could get around the city via bus, tram or walking pretty easily, and trains between Manchester, Sheffield and Leeds were all pretty clean, even late at night, and the most I paid for two round-trip tickets was £48.40 going to Leeds and back. Everything else was below £30 for two people, round trip.i Wherever I got off, I could get an Uber to where I was going for less than £10 if I didn't feel like waiting for a bus, or there wasn't a bus nearby. For a similar trip here, for one person going from NYC to Philadelphia and back would run me in excess of £100 with Amtrak making the trip in about 90 minutes, or closer to £30 round trip, but with each leg taking nearly 3 hours without any delays on NJ Transit. A 15 minute Uber here to work would routinely run me close to £20 each way, before accounting for a tip.
Nobody was screaming in my face asking for "donations," there weren't people with amplifiers blasting music, or homeless folks left to stew in their own filth keeping entire cars unusable for anyone else due to the stench. Even walking about the cities at all hours of the night, I had a grand total of 3 people ask me for money in a week. Residents apologized a few times about how awful things were there, but it was absolutely lovely, even in the parts they thought were local embarrassments for allegedly being unbearably dirty or run down. Granted, it was nice and cool, so I didn't get to see if Manchester gets the same lovely summer effect that NYC does, where every outdoor space smells like hot piss and garbage once the temperature clears about 27°C.
Granted, spending a week in a city as tourists isn't the same as living there, but from folks I know who've made the move, it was a massive upgrade in terms of things like public transit and general quality of life compared to life in the US or Canada. I ran the numbers, and it would actually make sense for me to take over a 50% pay cut if I could move there. Heck, it was cheaper for us to eat out for every meal for a week straight for two people and me buying several coffees out a day than it is for me to shop and prepare every meal at home and make all my own coffee here. Even if things aren't as good as they used to be, they've still got us soundly beat in many regards.
Where did you pick that nonsense up? Annual US aid amounts to around 15% of Israel’s military budget. That’s $3.8b compared to a GDP of $500b. It is a regional power with or without the US. US aid is in exchange for maintaining a major US military base in Israeli territory and access to Israeli intelligence. Israel spends more money on purchasing US weapons than it receives in US aid. US weapons also rely on technology designed and produced in Israel.
This isn't just about Israel's military budget. That helps, sure, but it's pretty crucial that Israel gets shielded from the consequences of its actions by the US constantly. If Israel were to start facing sanctions or have its saber-rattling no longer backed up by the threat of US intervention, be via sanctions or interceding directly, Israel would be a much less imposing power in the region. Military support is not the only measure of US support for Israel.
Why on earth would Russia or China want to watch Israeli power plummet when they could use it to project power into the Middle East and access it’s resources? Why do you think the US is there?
They could literally do the same thing without a) having to provide Israel ongoing material support and diplomatic cover, b) risk getting dragged into conflicts that don't benefit them by Israel, and c) alienate their existing allies in the region by backing a hostile power.
Israel provided a convenient foothold for the US half a century ago, when the surrounding Arab nations were more hostile to them. The situation has changed remarkably, and Israel is no longer unique in being willing to work with the US. Israel has, in fact, been a liability in making progress with this until relatively recently. But, sure, let's piss off the rest of the region so we can get Waze and some Israeli clementines out of things, seems like a good trade on the balance of it.
You want to claim I know so little about foreign policy, but you quite conveniently omit the many drawbacks to supporting Israel, as well as any of its weaknesses.
Israel is only a regional power by virtue of the US propping it up, it cannot maintain that status on its own. Why on earth would either Russia or China want to take that on, when they could just do nothing and watch Israeli power plummet.
Israel is hardly discredited, whatever the hell that means
Israel has no large, international backer that is both willing and able to step up and provide cover for it like the US does, and it lacks the might through its own weight around like Russia or China have long term. Without the constant backing of the US to shield from.the consequences of its actions, Israel would become the pariah state it rightfully should be.
The International community cares about as much about the Palestinians as they do about the Rohingya or the Darfuri, both of which are suffering ongoing genocides that I bet you didn't even know about.
And a lovely bit of whataboutism to round things out from you. Unfortunately for you, my memory is longer than a news cycle, but cute attempt at sounding like you were digging deep there.
US pulling out of Israel would be the most chaos inducing event in world history.
This is pure hyperbole. The most chaos you could get from this would be from Israel lobbing a nuke before getting taken out, which they already essentially threaten as it stands.
And what US rival is Israel going to find to replace it that has both the desire and means to do so? China and Russia don't stand to benefit from that, even if they wanted to pump billions of dollars into Israel a year. They already have influence in the region with other powers the US is hostile to, like Iran. Israel is increasingly internationally discredited, so it's not as though they're going to get a great diplomatic boost. They already have nuclear weapons of their own and pretty developed intelligence apparatuses. What would be the point of taking on such a massive liability?
And let's not forget that the region is in turmoil to begin with in large part because the US keeps intervening in it, as well as supporting Israel and other shitty governments in the region that are favorable to the US in some way. Israel itself destabilizes the region.
Maybe I would try an Android version, but Linux would be a pass, nothing they would come up with could displace MPD+ncmpc++ for me at this point.
That sounds more like a reason that western powers should have already nipped this in the bud long ago, rather than a reason to continue to give them carte blanche to commit war crimes. They already dropped the ball on that front, so realistically, they ought to be coming up with strategies to neutralize Israel, rather than embolden it. Perhaps they could take a page from Israel's book and carry out some strikes preemptively exercising their right to self-defense and dismantle the Israeli military and government.
Israel's unchecked existence is a liability to everyone, but it's not going to get any better by letting them go even longer.
Damn, you got me, I missed the part where I said not to vote for Biden under any circumstances.
Way to prove the point. Elections are not today, there is no reason not to continue to criticize Biden and pressure him to change his position in a meaningful way in order to make him more electable for those who won't support him if he continues his current policy, and along you come with the same tired shtick to say "If you don't bend over backwards to sing his praises, you're a Russian plant!"
If Biden actually changed his stance in a meaningful way, there's still plenty of time for him to win back those voters, but you folks come along running to shout out "But Trump!!!!" once anyone suggests that maybe giving him unconditional support no matter how shitty his stances are isn't the best way to convince him to not be just as awful while he still has time to do so.
You can set general options for all compilations in /etc/makepkg.conf, and package specific options would probably be best handled by just downloading a PKGBUILD for the package in question and editing it to include the option you want to enable. makepkg won't ask you about options by default when building something, but it's not that complicated to edit the PKGBUILD prior to calling makepkg.
abandoning Israel would be a disaster for everyone.
How would this be a disaster for anyone but Israel? Worst case scenario, it's a disaster for Zionists, the US military industrial complex profitting off them, and whatever portion of Israel's population opposes Israel's apartheid ethno-state, and I've only got sympathy for the last of them. At worst, it's an inconvenience for the US with Iran. Other than that, let Israel get rocked by sanctions and smacked around by their neighbors they've been antagonizing for decades with US support. Let Israelis go be refugees if necessary and there's an actual threat of loss of life. Otherwise, whoop dee doo, cutting off Israel means they get what they're due for. Israel is not some essential nation that the world would fall apart should it cease to exist in its current form.
It's a rolling release with minimal changes to packages from upstream, and generally the latest versions of available software in the repos. I guess you could go through and rebuild the whole system from source if you were determined to, but a quick look at the ABS wiki page doesn't make it seem like it's set up to make doing so all that easy. For other software not in the repos, the AUR makes it easy enough to build them from source, though there's often binary options available as well. The base install is pretty simple, so you can build upon it as you'd like if you really want to go wild on a minimal, highly customized system. Or you can go wild installing what you'd like and trying all the things.
As if it weren't bad enough that people choose to invest in such companies, you have large numbers of people convinced that Musk is tech Jesus, come to save the world from all its problems with his superior intellect.
And people are gaslighting themselves happily to suck up to the Dems instead of saying: “We will vote for you, but only, when you end this genocide and bring justice and peace to the people.”
Not just that, but they're twisting themselves into knots to try and convince people that unconditionally supporting Biden is the better option than continuing to pressure him to stop this and calling out his terrible stance here. Sure, everyone can vote as they please come election day, but we're a touch under 6 months out and people are all over this site browbeating anyone who doesn't toe the line and going "Don't you dare criticize our savior, Biden! If you say he needs to stop enabling Israel's genocide, you're just a Russian disinformation agent trying to keep people from voting so that fascists take over and murder all the minorities in the US. They'll probably double murder Palestinians, even!"
When you think he might finally be correcting course, he just immediately goes and undoes it.
When your justification is an uncertain investment, it isn't that hard of a concept to realize you're wrong. You're literally the only person I've ever seen advocating for the lump sum payment as the financialyl sound move when it quite nearly halves 100% sure income.
Inflation is also much less of a concern when you're talking about literal millions of dollars, unless you're talking about the Zimbabwe national lotto. If you're living in a way that your ability to live with $15,000,000/year towards the end of a 30-year annuity payout has materially changed, you have bigger issues than inflation going on.
the same reason that you’re better off taking the lump sum vs the 30 year pay out if you win the lottery.
money today that i can use today is worth more than money tomorrow.
You might be theoretically better off in an ideal outcome, but I'm pretty sure taking the 30 year payout is the generally recommended option. If I were to win the Mega Millions at the current level, I would need to make investments that paid $96,244,081 over 30 years just to equal the tax savings of taking the annuity versus the lump sum payment. That works out to a 3.1% return on the initial lump sum, every year, 30 years straight. Granted, this isn't exactly impossible, but it does require a few caveats. For example, this assumes you don't actually spend any of that money, investing 100% of it and never having a bad year. Of course, the average lotto winner is not exactly known for their great ability to invest their money. Meanwhile, there's nothing preventing the person taking the 30-year annuity from investing a portion of their annual payouts, which are guaranteed, while returns on investments are explicitly not guaranteed.
A guaranteed $96,244,081 return is a better investment than a possible $200,000,000 that's continent on absolutely nothing going wrong for the next 30 years, but the sort of people who run companies seem to forget about this these days.
Especially if you aren't financially that well off or on a good career track, I think it's really appealing just for the stability it affords. My current landlord has been a pretty good guy for us, but if I owned my apartment rather than renting, I wouldn't have to worry that I'll suddenly need to pay a ton more money if he dies and his kids decide to jack up the rent, or worse, having to uproot my life entirely and move out because of someone else's whims.
It's a very simplistic and reductive view of roads, though, in response to a post that specifically mentions another function of roads, namely, facilitating people's travels as individuals for their own purposes. It's like you telling someone you like using lemmy because you've found communities you enjoy participating in and individuals you like talking to, and they go, "But the internet is for commerce, the buying and selling of goods! Who is selling and who is buying in these instances?"
Your example is overly charitable, in my opinion. Not everyone is being malicious with these sorts of questions, but the person is ignoring some pretty clear context explaining other uses of roads to go attach a strawman. At the very least, it seems like a bad faith argument.