It was for me about ten years ago, but because of that brief dalliance, when Microsoft really finally started running toward this particular cliff last year, I was already familiar enough with Linux to be comfortable diving in completely; I don’t have a single Windows install in my house anymore. So it’s not always for nothing.
Honestly, I don’t even really know where they are unless I’m looking at them. The games that show all four face buttons and just highlight the one I need to push are the ones that really work for me.
No. It is so simple that I do not need to read beyond your first sentence.
Ok. Then I won’t read beyond yours either.
Eh, yes but no. Just because there’s no legal action doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be societal pressure to not be a creep and a weirdo. It should be unpopular to have a romantic relationship with anyone with whom you have a power imbalance (and age is definitely a power imbalance): dealing with the raised eyebrows and looks of concern can help keep misguided but well-meaning people from becoming creeps, and it can help the victims of predatory relationships realize when they aren’t in a good situation.
The previous commenter was right: there’s no magic switch that flips in your brain on your 18th birthday that makes you suddenly able to make adult decisions. Some people are ready, some aren’t. Biologically it’s uncommon for anyone to be truly grown before they’re in their late 20s, but our society decided we were going to set the bar super low; so for people who have trouble clearing even that bar, the societal pressure is a good thing.
I say this as a man who’s four years older than my wife, whom I met when I was 21 and she was 17. I knew I wasn’t going to date her until she turned 18, but even still, having the push-back of people who are smart and thoughtful, and who said, “hey, you need to recognize what is going on here, and how you’re going to mature before she does, and the potential for it to turn predatory even if you don’t mean for it to”—in hindsight I really value that warning, and it helped us to keep it really simple and light for the first several years while she figured out who she is and decided whether she even wanted to be with me.
Obviously we still ended up together, and now at 40 and 36 nobody bats an eye at our age difference. But when I think about the hurdles we faced even with only a 4-year difference, and imagine an age gap more than five times that size? I don’t think I could ever be in that situation, but even if I could, I’d want those smart and thoughtful people to check me.
The societal pressure doesn’t necessarily do the same things as the legal pressure, but it still helps.
Me: “ugh YES we can all see your screen, stop asking”
Also me: “ugh YOU FORGOT TO SHARE YOUR SCREEN idiot”
Interesting. Some of them are just dip switches, too. I hadn’t heard about needing a cable, that’s an interesting wrinkle.
I don’t have any specific recommendations for you, but I will say that
pretty much every modern Chromebook will be able to have Linux installed over ChromeOS. You might have to open it up and remove a write-protect screw.
Linux is a surprisingly good platform for games these days, actually. Steam has done a lot of work to get it there.
If you’re wanting lightweight specs, you’re probably going to find the best bang for your buck in an old Chromebook; however, I don’t know if you’ll see as many of those coming on the market, and you’ll want to watch out for old school devices. Those things get worked over pretty hard.
AOSP is still open-source. If they do, it can be forked.
The problem with banning weapons basically boils down to “weapons already exist.”
Bad actors have them and will not give them up voluntarily. It’s very simple to say “they should be banned,” but short of Star Trek-level scanner technology, it’s impossible to find all of them. If everyone else gives them up, then the bad actors essentially run the show.
If we were somehow able to ban and dispose of all existing weapons, another problem presents itself: namely, weapons can be created or improvised from other items. 3D printers can make guns (yes, really), knives are a standard and critical kitchen tool, baseball bats are recreational equipment, even pencils have been used as deadly weapons. “Banning weapons” requires banning essentially anything heavier or sharper than a balloon; and even then, you could suffocate someone with it.
Imagining that we were somehow able to do away with all things that could be weapons, as well, we are faced with a third problem: that during the time that we’re making this change, law-abiding countries and citizens will be disarmed, while criminal elements will retain their weapons.
Conservatives and gun nuts (particularly in the US) deploy this weapon on an individual level (“when guns are criminal, only criminals will have guns”), but it’s much more salient on a governmental level: to wit, when you are invaded by another country, you’re going to have to have your own weapons to counter theirs. And the promise of police (while debatably realized) is that they wield weapons to protect unarmed individuals from violence carried out by criminals with weapons.
Some people on Reddit were talking about how only dictators would want to disarm people.
They’re wrong that only dictators want to disarm people, but they are right that dictators have a vested interest in banning weapons. A resistance is a lot harder to put down when that resistance is armed.
The reality, though, is that this particular talking point was encouraged by the American NRA (National Rifle Association), which masquerades as an organization for firearm owners and users but is actually a professional organization of firearm manufacturers. It has spread to other countries from there.
I believe weapons should be banned
Should be? Yes. Can be, safely? Good question.
and that crime should not exist in the first place.
Everyone thinks that. That’s why we call it “crime.” It’s named that because it’s stuff we don’t want to happen, so we get together and assign a penalty to everything we don’t like and call them “laws.”
Okay, everything above is not my opinion, but reality. That’s the state of the world, and the logical outworking of the state of the world. What follows is my opinion. As you may be able to tell, I am a U.S. citizen, so my answer is based largely around that context.
We have to significantly ban and restrict and curtail weapons: sale, possession, and use. Dramatically. Especially firearms. Particularly especially military-grade weapons.
It should be essentially impossible for private citizens to own firearms, and those who are allowed to own them must provide a valid reason (“collecting” working, non-historical weapons is not a valid reason) and be subject to a background check, registration, psychological evaluation, extensive training, and mandatory safe storage requirements. They should be required to join and maintain good standing in their local National Guard or other defense organization. Individuals who currently own firearms and are unwilling or unable to comply with the new regulations must surrender their weapons or face imprisonment for the sake of public safety.
In line with that, ordinary police and private security firms should not be permitted to carry weapons more deadly than a nightstick and pepper spray; with more psychological evaluation and extensive training, perhaps a taser. Firearms should be exclusively allotted for specific use cases, such as animal deterrence in communities near wilderness areas, and perhaps SWAT teams. Qualified immunity should be abolished, and every person killed or injured by a police officer’s weapon should result in immediate suspension of the officer, pending an external audit and investigation.
All weapons and ammunition used by any private citizen, police officer, private security employee, or military personnel should be subject to strict check in/check out regulations, and should include a valid reason for checkout associated with specific training activities or a specific, single incident requiring their issue. Government employees (members of law enforcement and the military) and private security employees should be subject to mandatory bodycam activation (with the footage declassified) any time weapons are checked out.
That is what can be done now, safely, without unduly endangering individuals. We know that it can be done, now, safely, because many other countries have done it.
You just open it in Firefox and modify it. It’s only form filling for now.
I have concerns.
Best privacy
What does “best” mean here? Privacy is binary: either something is private, and only you decide who has access to it, or it isn’t.
and unbiased ad-blocking
Uh-oh. That’s a red flag. When a company makes a big deal out of being unbiased about something that isn’t inherently biased to begin with, I just automatically assume right-wing.
by default.
And how easy is it to change that default if you don’t like it? Or if YouTube kills ad blocking in it? No thanks, I’d prefer it be an extension, thanks.
Handy features like native !bangs
Custom search with extra characters. Firefox has had it for over a decade, and Chrome has had it for a while too.
and split view.
Pretty sure this has been in several browsers recently, too.
No adware,
Thanks, that’s…kind of the bare minimum in a browser?
no bloat,
Degoogled is already that for Chromium, if that’s really what you want. There are several Firefox forks that pull out a bunch of stuff and make it leaner, too.
no noise.
Bold move disabling the sound API. Respect. /s
People-first
Which people? Ok, this is easy to say, but essentially meaningless.
and fully open source.
Isn’t BSD a sharealike license? So they can’t not. Still, props to them.
At the end of the day, I think I’d still prefer a Gecko browser, or Degoogled if I absolutely had to use Chromium.
I can’t find any links to the project itself, only to announcements about the project. Anybody have anything more concrete? How far along is this project?
Agreed completely. A movie based on an overgrown Tunnel-O-Love?! Ridiculous. No way it’ll be anything even halfway good.
Shows how much I know.
Allowing the pirates to steal the show from capable leads is what makes the first one so good. Making the pirates the leads, on the other hand, ends up being disappointing (see the sequels). Interesting lesson.
I would never! Just the spar. And later, the mainsail. After that the keel, and maybe the deck and gunwales. Then perhaps the poop deck and the rudder, later the helm…
The mast he can keep. For a while. Well, a mast.
Honestly, this is potentially among the top five best film dialog moments of the past thirty years.
It’s ok. The people would’ve certainly Mole of Moles’d themselves long before that happened.
Yes. If it is built using public money, it belongs to the public.
Took me a minute, too.