If you're not aware of the subtle but pervasive linguistic technique here, you need to educate yourself. The supposed sympathetic party is always described in human-sounding terms, the supposed adversary is always dehumanized, using sterile language. And it works, it nudges those who don't think very critically into framing their subconscious opinions that way.
Your personal reaction to one incident of such isn't very relevant. It's a thing and it's nasty.
Just out here rubbing bug goo on plant corpses, guess we're weirder than the bees
An important step on any path to unity is a requirement that we all believe that the inherent value of human life does not vary by national origin. Demanding that our politicians do better, and stop misusing language in this consistent pattern to minimize perceived suffering of The Other - that's unity. "Israeli families" vs. "the people of Gaza" - isn't it self-evident, that is the wedge? Once you know to look for it, you see it used everywhere.
I don't want unity with people who aren't willing to make the above commitment. When demanding just minimal lip service to such an ideal from a public figure is "driving a wedge", I think you have some serious soul searching to do.
Wise words, Bil.
Best way I know is to observe them being unable to comply with legal demands to supply data when they receive them. From what I've heard Mullvad has passed that test, but I've never tried to follow up and find details.
That's how it reads to me too, accidentally saying "hurry up and riot already, something's gotta piss some of you off enough to do it".
Wild that this is where we are - our president trying to bait us into helping him justify massacring us.
I've never used Arch, so someone may give a better explanation, but an analogy would be - Arch is like getting a box of LEGO, SteamOS is like getting a pre built model made from LEGO.
And yeah, immutability is usually considered more beginner friendly because you're less able to break your system accidentally, and it's lots more straightforward to roll back to a previously working system, too, when things do break.
As for installing stuff on Steam Deck, I think that's by design, not an incidental flaw. It's a big contributor to stability. On Bazzite, which is similar, you can install whatever you like...into a container. Only a subset of software is supported for more direct installation. Keeping everything else isolated in containers keeps the system stable.
With any luck, collectivism will come to flourish, even if we have to get there by being backed into it.
Cheers!
Agree. We do need good people raising good people, to pass on the torch of compassion and all other good.
I'm not saying jump up and have kids, I'm saying there's a sacred duty available and inherently demanded, in teaching the next generation.
And as we see, we can no longer rely on hardly any facet of our society to do an even passable job, even from those who want to. In the US at least it is down to parents to shape the next generation. (As YouTube, etc., do it for us...)
Yet more precariously, this is true during a phase of human history that I'd argue is newly atomized, yet increasingly dependent on cooperation.
The future looks bleak, yes, and parenting well is one crucial part of any long-term solution to our problems. I say let's be careful with the dooming, there's good work to be done.
(...sadly too much work to do, in the literal sense, for me and most parents, but nonetheless)
Sounds pretty plausible. And in the past when there was decorum, the too-sincere just got quietly sidelined I imagine, wondering why they never seemed to get anywhere despite their loyalty and fervor. But today, when the party communication strategy is explicitly "carnival barker but a mix of vicious lies and middle school insults", welp, those zealots not only avoid being dealt with quietly, they get a platform, cuz they already had one, and it's one that rests on the larger platform where every heinous unsayable thing has already been publicly screeched, and also subsequently forgotten.
I hope she goes nuclear lol, she's gotta have some good dirt right?
I use these too. The "team sports" nature of it all is really deeply engrained, like a "water is invisible to a fish" kind of way. You can use that to surprise them and build some genuine curiosity sometimes.
It's really disarming and opens up convo when I seem to disagree with them on everything... but then just agree and help them attack whichever hideous Democrat they go after during a given conversation. Same for news, the conversation shifts in useful ways when they learn I dislike "their" (Fox and worse) news, as well as what they think of as "mine".
It's not enough to magically deprogram anyone, but it can start the gears turning. In my experience it usually takes the situation from two people standing across from each other fussing at one another, to two people standing together fussing at everything else. It's a start.
Not quite the same type of jackboot here, but nonetheless "Uvalde" is all we need to know about how heroism LARPers pick and choose their violence in the most vile ways.
Guarantee if we ever see an armed response to one of these ICE raids, the LARPers will fall into chaos and shoot everywhere, likely killing a WHOLE lotta people by accident, probably including a lot of each other (all of which will be blamed on the targets of course).
And you'd imagine if there were any of these hardened criminals among their targets like they claim, at least one of em would've tried to shoot their way out of deportation by now. Weird!
Honestly, with some tweaks, sounds like not a bad way to start getting your random corporate social media enjoyers to care about privacy.
I get it. Hasn't been my experience.
Well, yeah, fair point lol, I definitely have an imagined "type" in mind here and jumped to the assumption that it's all those who are vocally "lesser of two evils".
Really I was less making an assumption and more just (inaccurately, as you pointed out) using that as shorthand for the set of voters who vote lesser of two evils, but then go on to do the kinds of shit that allows for the image above. Berate others for daring to demand more than two evils, or encourage trying to find common ground with the increasingly far right as a viable means of progress, and worse.
You're right, it's not everyone who talks about the importance of still voting when it's two bad candidates, and I myself think it's important to do that. I think it just feels like the folks who are always making the discussion about that idea are also usually the ones doing the other destructive (while condescendingly ~well-intentioned) stuff I was describing. Sounds like you feel the opposite, which I'm willing to chalk up to the nature of having different experiences, idk. Definitely not common enough to use as shorthand apparently, that's on me.
I think your question is intended to silently include "what's the alternative for a voter [in a given election]?" - if I'm wrong about that, my bad.
But the issue to me is not about choices in individual elections. The issue is that these vocally "lesser of two evils" voters do their thing, then smugly pat themselves on the back and self-righteously condemn the sad state of affairs, every time...
And then continue to take the idiot bait that anything left of present Democrats is scary bad socialism/communism, no further-left candidate can have a shot with real Americans, and wouldn't our energy be better spent trying to find things we agree on and can get done together?
They don't learn anything about how the rest of the world works politically, they don't know dick about any candidates or ideas that don't appear ready-made and polished on a television screen, and yet they think they're the ones helping, and if only we all just did like them, this place would turn right around. They want to do nothing, to sound wise, and to feel morally superior all at the same time. This is the core of the vocally "lesser of two evils" voters.
I know because I used to be one of these insufferable people I'm describing.
Idk, being locked in to using only communication protocols that are known to be roughly wide open seems like kind of a privacy non-starter, right? Sort of fails the attempt before you even start, no?
Edit: a wiser person than me reads the rest of the thread before a comment like the above, but I'm not them sadly. (AKA, plenty of good points made by others)
This is such a strange and out-of-touch comment (to me) that I can't tell if it's bad sarcasm or...what.
They also just steal data from their clients. At least one US military branch is suing them over doing exactly that during one of their contracts.