Tariffs or economic protectionism is not bad in and of itself. Such a plan including tariffs would also require giving incentives/financing for domestic economic development and a focus on long term stability. Trump is slashing expenses and busting through the door with exorbiant tariffs. Calling this dumb is a ridiculous understatement.
^This. People act so helpless to big tech, and especially Windows. Linux is still more effort for normies, but it should not be an issue for most people on this sub to want learn it-you are doing things already on Windows that would not be much different than Linux. AI w/ Nividia alone justifies Linux because Windows has performance issues. Then you have the freedom of leaving Windows if it continues to get hostile.
Unless you're working for a company where you have no choice. Then you have no freedom to leave Windows. You have, obviously, the freedom to leave your job, but let's be adult.
Because it's adult to accept being spied on and your infos sold to whomever Microsoft seems worthy? Sure I can understand it, but I don't think it has anything to do with being an adult. Just what degree of personal privacy you are willing to part with.
Hard to say but I believe at this point it somewhat is if you use a minimal setup. But once more people move to it, we can be sure there will be more attacks like the infamous xz-utils backdoor.
Is your anecdotal attack on "cancel culture" more then just biased and veiled defense of literature censorship? Why would a rational being turn away from the OP and respond with such?
I for one can see similarities between the canceling and the censoring mob.
I’d say it’s your own bias that sees it as an attack on cancel culture, as opposed to a commentary on the sad state of extremism and intolerance that leads us into hard-left then hard-right swings (and back and forth).
Libraries cannot and should not perform such a task. External bodies like peer reviews are meant to assess quality and only if reputation of a publication has plummeted because of it, libraries should intervene and pull the content.
The harder (rhetorical) question is, if any solid quality assessment had been made by the executive.
It's nothing but out of touch at this point, and adds nothing to the discourse
Exactly. Its a communications problem.
Its hard to have a decent critical conversation when one side has a biased view about $symbol. Both communicating parties need to reach the same interpretation of a message, otherwise the conversation is broken. Thats why you shouldnt say the N-word or throw out a heil heart on stage (unless you want to hide behind this ambiguity). Or why its so difficult to have critical conversations with strong believers, for you its just evolution or vaccines but for the other side it may affect the core of their identity and the ape goes defense mode.
The result is that the discourse does not deal with differentiated cases but _only_ with simplistic labels like "chill speech", "woke", etc. because the more biased side drags it down into the mud.
For instance, the "chill speech" label is actually dependent on the "racist" label that initiated it. If a case shows clear racist behavior, then dismissing the lefts reaction as censorship is unjustified or biased. The other way works too, if there is no racist behavior, the censorship blame would be justified.
And since you cant look into peoples heads to clearly identify racist intentions, it falls back to interpreting messages. The problem with biased people is, they are not aware even of their unawareness. If you would ask Musk whether he is a neo-nazi, his response would be something like "hell no". Fast forward the dystopian timeline and his response might be "always have been".
The left has IMO more unbiased awareness about systemic issues -- but is not free of bias either. The right is in its core biased indentity politics about $culture -- but is not totally host to tribalism either.
My advise, avoid popular symbols at all cost and if you come close to using one, augment it with case specific background, even a vague "_unjustified_ chill of speech" would suffice. If someone opens with "the woke left" and shows no signs of differentiation -- or even better, acknowledgement of core leftist topics -- i mentally turn away. The comment you replied to was about personal anekdotes and projections and the one symbol that rubs me the wrong way too, even before trumps abuse.
(1) Bypassing the judicative branch is authoritarian.
(2) You just claimed trump has access to smart advisors and some hidden masterplan but you ignore all counter indication. He ousts critical journalists, nominates incompetent staff, invasion-mongers, tweets and plays golf alot.
If i can see any common factor in his insanity, its the need to have an enemy to pose as the strong man against, which indicates that trump does not have a constructive vision for the US.
Absolutely baffling how this entire interview feels like a sales pitch. Fox News consistently fails to ask though questions - even tries to steer the conversation to another of Elons strong points, AI. I cant understand how anyone with a trace of critical thinking falls for this.
reply