This is why I as a multi billionaire believe we need to work on plan B on Mars.
I know that won’t help the billions of people left on Earth, but at least they can die peacefully, knowing that the richest people will have a chance.
/s
“There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.”
But per the quote in the meme above, you can’t have willing participation, it is always coerced.
And you still don’t provide sources.
I agree, the phrasing is bad, but that doesn’t change that if you read it carefully, the meaning is clear.
There is absolutely no reasonable basis for claiming he is defending pedophiles, when what he does is the direct opposite, by logically proving that a common defense they use is invalid, because you can never claim to know participation is voluntary. It is per definition coerced.
Everytime someone calls their system a Linux based OS and not GNU/Linux based OS downplays the work he put in.
Absolutely, and the fact that people didn’t adopt it creates confusion, some people claim Android is also Linux, which you can argue, but it’s definitely NOT GNU/Linux, and it’s definitely NOT a free desktop OS as defined by freedesktop.org either. There’s a huge difference.
Especially since Android generally means Android with Google apps, and not AOSP. AOSP is open source, but Android with Google apps is not.
And what’s your point with posting this? My guess is that you don’t even understand it.
He is saying there is no such thing as willing participation from a child in pedophilia. Are you saying there is?
I can’t remember having seen them debating each other, either in person or otherwise. But their positions are well known. Linus chose the GPL license from an engineering/pragmatic viewpoint, while Stallman is an idealist.
Apparently they are quite friendly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDxMJQLXmBE
IDK if federations doesn’t work, I already wrote to another response that I use Bash.
Since the Amiga in the 80’s I considered CLI windows and Shell as the same thing,because they kind of were on the Amiga, as there was only 1 shell, and a CLI window was also called Shell. But that was obviously a misunderstanding I just never got quite rid of.
Ah OK, Bash because it’s default.
xterm, because shortcut keys do what they are supposed to.
Edit:
Bash because it’s default.
Interesting, I just don’t get that last line, Linux came out in 1991, so how is 1991 way before Linux?
I’m not sure either, that if the GNU project had managed to make a decent kernel, that it would have made the world a different place today. At least not for the better.
The Linux kernel is the most successful piece of open software ever made, and it’s GPL like GNU. I am far from sure another kernel would have been equally successful either technologically or in benefiting all sorts of computers.
That’s an impressive list, 👍
I admit I forgot AIX, but the others there are reasons I didn’t consider, I have explained in other posts why on BSD and MAC OS. Same arguments are true for most of your list.
But it’s still an impressive and interesting list. And yes AIX absolutely qualifies.
Good catch, I guess that’s mostly true, but Windows NT was an evolution of Windows that mainly got rid of the DOS legacy. Which after Windows NT ran on a compatibility layer, where Windows 3 ran on DOS directly.
It’s a bit of a grey area. But I’d say windows NT was a continuation of Windows that shared almost the entire API from Windows 3.0.
The old “System n” OS was also called MAC OS. And the switch to OSX was a completely new OS where the old MAC OS software ran on a compatibility layer.
I guess it can be seen either way.
Yes BSD just hasn’t had much luck, I have no idea why the GNU project didn’t use the BSD kernel? They say the Linux kernel was the final piece to make it a complete OS. But AFAIK BSD existed with a kernel way before that.
Windows became popular with Windows 3.0 that came out 1990, And the Linux kernel came in 1991, but the first distro which is a better comparison came in 1993.
So Windows had a 3 year advantage.
But that wasn’t the more crucial thing, the real advantage was DOS compatibility, which everything legacy ran on. So with Windows people and companies could still run their old DOS programs, they could even run them better than in an old fashioned DOS system, because Windows was brilliant for multitasking DOS programs.
That’s kind of true, but MacOS and Mac OSX are 2 different things. What is based on BSD is the MAC OSX that came out in 2001 AFAIK.
And BSD was interrupted for 2 years because of copyright disputes with AT&T. If that hadn’t happened, BSD would be the longest continuous OS today, and probably way more significant than it is.
I don’t consider MAC OSX as part of BSD, just like Android isn’t part of Linux Desktop, but only uses the Linux kernel. OSX took parts of BSD and shielded it behind a proprietary wall, because the BSD license offer no protection from that. So they become separate projects the moment they enter the Apple domain.
Problem here is when people mix up the use of the word Linux as an OS with Linux the kernel. I am 100% sure OP meant Linux as a Desktop OS like GNU/Linux or something like Free desktop according to freedesktop.org. Using his experience with EndeavorOS as an example.
But you are right, it can be said Unix/BSD has an even longer running time, but it has been somewhat problematic and interrupted because of AT&T and SCO and Novell.
Yes it is absolutely cool. 😎
I tried Linux earlier, but didn’t find it really useful until 2005 when I switched to Linux as my main OS, but games were a huge problem, so I had to dual boot for a couple of years, before I dropped Windows completely.
Yes it literally has come a long way, all the way from 1991 to 2024, I think the only other OS that has managed that is Windows.
I know that’s not quite what you meant, it was just a thought I came to think of reading the headline.
But apart from that, it’s also become quite good, but IMO it has been for more than a decade now.
Absolutely, but I think they feel they have to, to get good reviews.
Nice to finally see a review stating what I’ve been thinking ever since the Samsung Galaxy 2 was scorned 13 years ago by reviewers for having a plastic back, and not having the premium feel of the much more fragile iPhone.
Ever since it’s like a conspiracy of reviewers hailing the premium feel of metal unibodies or glass backs, despite the clearly lower quality of those materials, while dissing superior plastic bodies that weigh less, has way better shock absorption, is less bulky, and is less slippery and therefore less prone to drop out of pockets or bags.
The main reason it feels more “premium” is the extra weight, which is clearly detrimental to usability.
It’s like cheap stuff like cheap loudspeakers, where they have iron bars in them to ad weight, to make the speaker “feel” better. Where a speaker with a stronger (magnet) may actually be better.
But with phones it is 100% people fooling themselves, if they think heavier is better, and fragile glass is somehow better than sturdy quality synthetics.
Just because you are still voting Biden, doesn’t mean you don’t care.
It just means you still don’t want the raving malignant narcissist Trump.
Any somewhat normal person would be the obvious choice over Trump. Any person who is not clearly a traitor to USA and Democracy would be preferable to Trump.