Fair, i certainly couldve used better wording

I’m of the opinion that a lot of gun control is ineffective, especially given what guns are supposed to mean. Yes places like Australia have been extremely successful in removing guns, but also look at their policing system and governmental overreach which is honestly quite terrible. I’m of the opinion that the most effective gun control is changing the culture surrounding guns. Bring back (optional) shooting classes in schools, teach kids (and adults) gun safety and actual useful knowledge about firearms. Regulate the access, storage, and use of ammunition. Change the culture from people thinking they’ll be John Wick once they get their glock to people who actually understand that firearms are tools that can be used as weapons, and that they require time, effort, training, and a lot of responsibility to use safely. The cat is out of the bag in the US; guns aren’t going away. Acting like we can remove them is silly, but we can change the perception around them.

I also think we need similar movements for a lot of things, like cars.

P-90 or PS-90

I agree with you but that doesn’t mean everyone does. Whether you like it or not, social media platforms are going to be used. OP is just sharing a tool they built and believe may be useful to others for free. There’s no need to shit on their work just because you ideologically disagree with the underlying services managed. Again, I feel the same way as you but OP is contributing a useful tool to the people; that is seldom a bad thing. I could see myself using this to boost my LinkedIn presence, because it’s one of the few things I have and need in my early career. Would I like to get rid of my LinkedIn? Absolutely. Do I despise most social media platforms (including Lemmy to a degree)? Definitely. Do I appreciate OP for making and sharing this? You bet I do.

Someone linked a story that didn’t have an image (didn’t watch the video) so this may not actually be fake

that’s fine, give me the hammer. I despise this increasingly pervasive online first mentality. I like native applications using native toolkits. They’re installed on my machine for a reason. I don’t want the clusterfuck of HTML, CAS, and JavaScript managing my interfaces; they’re horrible. Just because a monkey eating pop rocks can piss out a Pollock doesn’t mean i wanna buy it. I am absolutely willing to trade some UI/UX niceties for actual fucking applications.

My brother in Christ, im sorry to inform you but the upcoming fiscal crisis are gonna be some of the least of your kids worries. I’m still probably closer in age to you rather than them, but i grew up knowing that money is gonna mean jack shit once the water starts boiling (metaphorically, but hyperbolically realistic). We’re the frogs in the pot and the economy is gonna be the least of our troubles. We’re seeing a global rise in fascism, climate disasters, war, inequity, and yes financial instability. If you wanna help your kids, get involved in the community and organize. Start unions at your work places and march in protests for a better future. I’m not talking about a stronger or more fashy future, but one where we work together. Join or make mutual aid networks where you live. The best thing you can do for your children (imo, coming from a young person) is help set up the future you want for them. I would hope that’s one of community and mutual aid where we help each other not because we expect a reward or are paid to, but because together we stand taller and can hoist up those who cannot stand on their own. I hope i don’t sound too preachy, but it sounds like you love your kids so I implore you to get involved further. The future did not look kind to me when I was a child, and it looks even less hospitable now. We can change that. Direct action and mutual aid are the way forward to a better future imo.

Security is a give and take, and with bleeding edge you have to balance it more. Yes bleeding edge can mean bleeding hearts when a security issue is discovered in new code. But just as often, if not more frequently, it also means you get security patches before almost anyone else. And the AUR is insecure, as it’s a user repository. But 99% of the time if you read the PKGBUILD (it’s really easy, you can usually skim it) and check the sources you’ll be fine. The AUR being insecure isn’t bad, it just means you need to put more effort into checking on stuff and you need to be responsible for your security. These aren’t bad habits to have in general, but it’s a bit of a learning curve coming from systems that expect to handle most of your security for you.

I think it’s important to keep in mind here that there is a very marked difference between vanilla Arch and its derivatives. A lot of derivatives will set up a lot of base system software with sensible defaults, whereas with vanilla Arch it’s often up to you to find out that you need that software, and then you also need to figure out a lot of configuration. Not having to do that saves you from a lot of issues.

I would actually love a portal miniseries like this

I mean i definitely do in a sense of the word

We have no right to judge intelligence purely through our perception of intelligence, rather we must seek to broaden our understanding and view of intelligence and sapience. Yes there aren’t any other species that are sapient like humans, but then there are very very few species that are like humans. Dolphins and other aquatic mammals are known to have complex social structures and languages, and are very evidently self aware and able to comprehend themselves and their existence. Are we to deny their sapience simply because they don’t have economies of scale or what we perceive as civilization? I would argue that dolphins, elephants, whales, and some birds have formed (by our standards) rudimentary civilizations that are practical and necessary for their survival.

If we expand the concept, i would argue that similar things could be said about insects/bugs if we aggregate the intelligence. Ants have colonized every continent except for Antarctica. They have complex social structures and very clear markers of civilization. The only difference is that they function as a collective rather than as an individual. Are we to say that the Borg are not sapient because their civilization is predicated on the collective rather than the individual? The biggest thing I would have against calling ants sapient is that I am unsure of how self aware the collective is, but is that a necessity for sapience? To what degree is it necessary? Are we basing this off of a model of ourselves, of which only we fit into? Do we even have the right to demarcate what is and isn’t intelligent, sentient, and/or sapient? I would posit no to a lot of these questions, especially given that I also think we are a lot less intelligent and sapient than we think we are. I don’t believe a truly intelligent and sapient being would judge the intelligence and sapience of another being, but simply accept that it is as it is.

Snaps are a closed-source proprietary packaging format that Canonical controls. And they have also altered apt on Ubuntu to download snaps first before native packages. You may be using snaps right now without realizing it, which is also part of the issue.

i would absolutely say there are other sapient species, we just don’t like to think of them as such. Obviously a lot of aquatic mammals come to mind, but I think there’s a very very good case to argue that cephalopods, elephants, some aquatic mammals, and some birds are sapient. Especially by sci-fi rules. I think there’s sufficient evidence to show that elephants, dolphins, and maybe corvids or cephalopods would pass the trial of Commander Data and be considered intelligent and sapient life.

I think that a separate free market that is isolated from the necessities of life can help fulfill human ambition, but there need not be scarcity of the necessities of life.

or a system and culture that isn’t predicated on a fear of artificial scarcity

I prefer multiple systems of scale based on mutual aid, where all shared institutions and resources are collectively owned and managed by the people working in those institutions without the obligation of profit. Then those institutions would cooperate to form larger scale systems that can form the complex widespread support for our technologically advanced society without having to be centrally managed or owned. Necessarily, but not ideally, there would be a limited free market that is completely isolated from the actual organizational structure (no lobbying, no private ownership of necessities, etc.) to allow interaction with non-collectivist states and entities.

generator hookup shouldn’t be one of those, as shouldn’t proper generator transfer switches have plugs designed so you don’t need a suicide cable?

is that chromium?

According to DuckDuckGo

State Capitalism: An economic system that is primarily capitalistic but there is some degree of government ownership of the means of production.

Basically capitalism managed and owned by the state. This is not communism, nor even socialism. China is communist in name only.