I dislike the way it’s becoming a dependency for many desktop environments and taking over many functions. Plus there’s the fact that (https://itsfoss.com/news/systemd-age-verification/)[systemd is preparing to enable age verification], And also the fact that it breaks compatibility with other UNIX-like systems.

Since I recently setup a yunohost server, I use Nextcloud instead of google Drive pr Filen, Vaultwarden/Bitwarden for passwords, and searxng as a search engine; all self-hosted. My internet service provider makes self-hosting for emails complicated, if not impossible, so for that I currently use Disroot (which offers other services as well btw, like git and xmpp, good to check out).

For youtube, on my phone it’s mostly through Newpipe, but I also use peertube for the content that exists there. Otherwise, I just access youtubw through the web… Which leads me to browsers. I avoid chromium-based ones, but I also disapprove of Firefox’s turn towards AI, so I use waterfox on desktop and fennec on mobile.

As for Arch Linux… I was with you a few days ago, but I just switched to Artix. I’m not a huge fan of Systemd, and Dinit makes it boot a bit faster.

Only if you have a very long arm, like Monkey D Luffy.

This is what is meant by “piss off”.

Okay, so we’ll break it down in incresingly narrow boxes :

1- Hatred of religion in general

Religion has been and continues to be a tool for legitimizing power structures. As such, they’re associated with the oppressive systems they’ve historically upheld. That goes from state structures like monarchy to modes of production like slavery, reaching whithin family dynamics, like patriarchy. Atheism was until recently broadly criminalized throughout the world. Atheism, or at least secularism, is a feature of many ideologies that arose since the late 18th century to uproot these systems, while religions are claimed by ideologies that arose in reaction tooto these. Politically, religion is therefore seen as conservative .

2- Hatred of Abrahamic religions

Some see these religions (Christianity, Islam, Druzism, Judaism) as inherently more oppressive than other, because they see it as a sin to worship gods other than their, and do not permit synchretism like other religions do. This is a big debate, and it doesn’t hold true to the same extent for all Abrahamic religions, but I’m not getting into details on this.

3- Hatred of Christianity

There are religious people who hate christianity for theological reasons, but I’m once again more interested in the political aspect. Many hate christianity for its role in colonization and association with western imperialism. It’s basically the first two points applied to specific circumstances of christianity : How it came to eradicate paganism in Europe and attempted (sometimes continues to attempt) to do the same globally, how, using colonial means it erases cultures. Same can be said of Islam to an extent, and you could say the main difference is that Christianity has been successful more recently and more globally. But then again, while they’ve had the same attitude towards paganism, Islam has historically tolerated more religious in their states, as long as these were “religions of the book”. Tho it’s true that the situation has come to be a bit reversed on that point…

4 a- Hatred of Catholicism for theological reasons :

Idk about the details, but part of a reason why the reform happens was that catholicism was seen as drifting to far from true belief and focusing on preserving and enriching itself as an institution. Other accusations include being too close to paganism due to the cult of saints and the continuity with Roman institutions (diocieses that predate the christianisation of the empire, nuns too similar to Vestal virgins…), and the fact that at the time, the mass was always in Latin although most people didn’t understand it.

4 b- Hatred of Catholicism : Post-colonial reasons

Point 3 applied to former colonies of France, Spain and Portugal, for which evangelisation was purely Catholic. the Catholic church continues to wield large power there, and some people consider its influence a remnant of colonialism. However, it is interesting to note that catholicism can be seen the opposite way by people from catholic countries for which a protestantprotestant country is seen as a greater or more recent oppressor (like Ireland or Puerto-Rico).

4 c- Hatred of Catholicism : Structural reasons

Catholiscism has a strict clergy hierarchy, moreso than Protestantism or Islam. Some see this as wrong in itself for philosophical or theological reasons, but even if that is not the case, this means the Catholic Church, more than others, can be perceived as an institution with agency and responsabilities. More than others, they’re expected to answer to their past positions and to solve their ongoing issues, something it struggles with as it doesn’t want to alienate the more concervative parts of its clergy. Also, this leads me to the next point :

4- d : The pedophilia thing. This is already very debated in the other comments, so I’m not gonna get in the details, but clearly not a good look.

4- e: Catholics in majority protestant country

Ecumenical debates pass over the heads of most christians, who just go with the form of christianity that is the “default” in their country/region. But what about those raised in families that hold on to their religions where it is a minority? This point seems important to me because a lot of the debates about Catholiscism I see online are really about catholicism in the USA, where it is a minority. In such countries, catholics will usually be seen as more pious and conservative than other christians, and quite often they’ll be, for several reasons :

• Principle of selection: A family that is just vaguely christian, upon immigrating, could’ve converted to better integrate. If they didn’t, it’s either because their specific belief was important to them personally, or because the community in which they integrated was mostly of other catholics, making it a solidarity factor which in turn increases its importance.

• Sense of responsability : If holding a belief is an active choice rather than going with the flow, believers will tend to give it more mind. They may feel they have more of a personal responsability to uphold it. This can culminate in what’s known as “siege mentality”: People who feel like an important part of their way of life or their belief system is threatened will react with fervor, oftem violence. This is why so many religious or political speech relies on tropes such as “They’re trying to steal/destroy/corrupt our thing!”

No, this is wrong, Linux can run on an HDD.

I started selfhosting recently ! Yunohost makes it really easy, especially if you want to have several applications on your server that may or may not be on the same domain. But you can always go classic with Debian (any other linux distro could do, but Debian’s stability makes it ideal. Yunohost is also based on Debian).

Yeah, that’d mean you need some type of source accessible license. Not sure which specific one tho, you’ll have to look deeper into it’

Yes, I can go into more details! In tge early manga, Yugi solves tge puzzle in chapter 1 and transforms into Yami Yugi after both him and Joey (Jono-Uchi in the manga) are threatened by a guy who was at first oretending to be defending Yugi against Joey who was bullying him but then immediately demanded money from him. Yami Yugi challenges him to a game where they out the stack of money on their own hands and start picking bills with a knife (they must each take at least one per turn but lose if they stab their hands). When the other guys tries to cheat by stabbing Yugi, he uses tge power of the ouzzle to drive him insane as a punishment.

The rest is along these lines for a long time, a new villain and a new game every two chaoter. Sometimes they’re plugging actual games, I think some chaoters might be sponsored, lie the tamagochi one.

But interestingly, the first one with the card games isn’t. I think it’s strongly imolied to be a reference to Magic: The Gathering (hence why they say it’s from the US, for example). But since they didn’t use the actual name or monsters and didn’t get into details of the rules, there was potential for monetization, which was realized a but later.

Kaiba is already the villain of the first chapters featuring the card game, but the first episodes of the anime are really a mix of the two first Kaiba encounters, which are many chapters apart (and the card game doesn’t come back until Kaiba does).

In the first encounter, Kaiba doesn’t have the Blue Eyed White Dragon, he steals it from Yugi who borrowed it from his Grandpa and Yami Yugi defeats him. We have the first idea of “the soul of cards” whith the BEWD refusing to fight for Kaiba. But we’re not really told that cards have an inherent soul because they’re from a sacred game, that’s all invented later. It’s more that this card was given to Yugi’s grampa by a precious friend and he treasures it because of it; and objects that are precious to someone become imbued with their soul.

Second encounter is after Kaiba beat Yugi’s grandpa and ripped his dragon. Yugi and friends actually have to climb a tower full of deadly games and traps to get to him, and then it’s the first duel from the anime.

Extra elements that are explained by this is that the inspirations for the hollograms Kaiba created is the traumatizing hallucinations Yami Yugi made him experience during his first duel. The reason why Yugi’s grandpa was unwell and in danger after the duel is that Kaiba, immitating Yami Yugi, subjected him to hollograms of mobsters attacking him after defeating him, which gave him a heart attack.

Shahdi and Bakura both appear a bit before tge manga shifts completely to card games, hence why Bakura’s introduction in the anime was pretty rushed. In the manga, the first game he plays is a ttrpg.

You’re on the open-source community, of course we’ll be biased in favour of open source. One thing to point out is that open-source and closed source are both pretty broad categories that cover several licenses. Source available means people can see the code, but there are restrictions to how they can use it. Is there a specific thing you don’t want people to do with your code? Do you not want them to edit it for example? Or you’re fine with them editing it, but not for commercial purpose ? Any restriction of this type will make it source-available. If you’re fine with them doing anything, it’s open source. If you want them to mention somewhere that their code is based on yours, it’s still open source. And if you want any code made by editing yours to also be open source, that’s still open source (that’s the idea of the GPL). But other restrictions might make it not fit that category.

I personally usually default to the GPL3, I’m fine with people doing anything with my code except making it non-open source. Well “my code”… It might be a bit presumptious of me, I’m not really a programmer, I’ve just made a few small and not very useful things. There may be legitimate reasons for not wanting your code to be open source sometimes, but for me the stakes have always been low.

As for whether using Github creates an expectation for Open-Source… Not so much at this point. It’s very used by the Open-Source community, but not only. Plus, it’s not really open-source itself, so the most purist prefer other git platforms like git-lab, forgejo or source-hut.

I think there’ll always be an issue depending on how dependent a project is on a company. Because the main risk isn’t that some bumbleling idiot of a CEO will run the projects and his company to the ground, but that sensible people will take decisions that serve their own interests, but not the interests of users.

Free software creates a framework wherein companies may have an interest in the success of a project and contribute to it. This is a good thing, insofar that to companies, the project is just a tool that needs to work well and to the programmers, the company is just one of several contributors.

In a community driven project, those who take decisions are the programmers who directly contribute to it and who are also usually users. Their interests are closer to those of all other end users. They want the project to work, and that may also be what financial contributors want.

However, if the software is a product of the company, they’ll intend to extract value from it directly. The interest of shareholders will supercede those of programmers and end users. That is why they may take decisions that are bad from a user’s perspective, not because their dumb, but because they have other interests in mind.
Inserting adds is a good way to get fundings from add companies at the detriment of users.
Adding suscription tiers is a good way to extract wealth from part of the users. Adding AI is a good way to secure loans from banks that speculate on the AI bubble, and maybe even from companies like Nvidia, interested in making the bubble last and grow.

It’s not a matter of being sensible or not, it’s a matter of whose interest you’re sensibly serving.

What was that joke about Firefox again? “We’re the browser beloved for being the only one not hitting our dick with a hammer. Now, you’re probably wondering why we brought this hammer and and took out our dick. Well you see…”

More seriously, I think until the bubble pops, writing “AI” anywhere is a way for companies to attract fundings, and that money is too easy for many to pass.

That’s why I tend to trust community managed distros over corpo ones. I don’t see Arch or Debian pulling this bullshit.

Tho, I’d still be suspicious of the other big private company, Redhat; which is very involved in maintaining Systemd.

Honestly, if it comes to this I’ll distro-hop as far as I need to escape AI.

Also, countries need authoritarian governments because lobsters pee on each-other’s faces.

The Light is what is being perceived in that example. The point of mentioning that the retina is inside the eye is that it means light must be inside the eye too when it hits it.

deleted by creator

tell me how you’re not actually in contact with something.

Not what’s being argued here.

True

True, but the pressure wave is what is being perceived when hearing, light is what is being perceived when seeing, I never said what was being perceived had to be matter. In the case of touch, some molecules may enter the skin, but that is not the cause of the sensation. Even if you imagine an perfectly hard, smooth and clean surface that sheds no molecule, you should still be able to feel of you touch it.

However, I thought about it after making this post, but there also is a small amount of kinetic energy entering you when you touch something, and that may be what triggers your nerve… So I guess even in the case of touch, it remains true that you can only perceive something that’s inside of you.

The nerves were already inside tho, they didn’t enter.

The Mysterious Golden Cities ! At least the first season, I’m not too sure about the directions it took after that, when it became 3D animated… Then, Ewilan’s Quest ! I don’t think there’s an official translation or a legal way to watch it outside of France for now, but if you put it at the end of your list there might be one by the time you get to it.