TheEntity

You cannot let or forbid a 16yo to use stuff. You can only decide whether they will do it in the open or in hiding. Personally I’d rather have them talk to me about it than hide it from me.

Whether it works or not, this looks incredibly fun! That’s a win in my book.

I’m still confused why people are so hell bent on using a single window exclusively. It’s a natural way to group the tabs and it was there from day one!

them trying to get out of ever having kids

As if it was a bad thing. Or the doctor’s decision for that matter. If they don’t want to have kids, it’s well within their right to keep it this way.

The only thing we know without a proof is that they might be doing it. We don’t have a proof they do it but we also don’t have any proof they are incapable of doing so. A reasonable course of action would be to take precautions against it while not condemning them either, until they are either proven actually guilty or actively unwilling to up their security, which would also strongly imply the former.

Until it’s proven the data is E2E encrypted, it’s a fair assumption it can be read by a 3rd party, either now or in the future. E2EE is the only proof that matters, everything else is just a corporate “trust me bro”.

Looks like a boring update but being boring is kinda the thing I appreciate in GNOME. It’s all about expectations.

I’m sure we can compromise on a mandatory database of registered AI-generated content that only the corporations can read from but everyone using AI-generated content is required by law to write to, with hefty fines (but only for regular people).

Single tweets are rarely useful without being able to read some context that isn’t visible without logging in.

The same could be said about any game with any non-Steam availability. I don’t think that was OP’s intent. That being said, emulators surely were not the intent either.

It still needs a phone number for registration. You just don’t need to share it with people you want to talk with.

But wouldn’t a case do exactly what you want? It would make the damn thing thicker and flat on the back.

Making quality tools due to long-standing processes is definitely a different breed of tradition than oppressing minorities because they don’t fit someone’s “traditional” worldview.

To better illustrate my first post: The Victorinox craft isn’t high quality because it’s a tradition. It became a tradition because it’s high quality. If we subtract it being a tradition, we still have a reason to keep making it this way. The same cannot be said about oppressing people, unless one literally views human suffering as value added.

I think there is some confusion between tradition and well-tested processes. I’d hardly consider creating quality products a tradition.

If he’s being a putin stooge because it’s good for his business, he’s still being a putin stooge.

A mixture of NixOS and Debian, depending on the machine. NixOS is trivial to maintain and to keep predictable and tidy. When its weirdness is a problem, Debian is my answer. It doesn’t get more normal than Debian.

If you’re asking about a personal opinion: any policy purely based on tradition is worthless. Tradition is just peer pressure from dead people. Just like any peer pressure, it’s highly unlikely to produce anything but grief. If something is based purely on tradition without any other reason to exist, it’s unlikely to be an optimal policy.

Back to the initial question. I don’t think we can get infinitely progressive but we can keep subtracting the cruft of tradition until there is no necromantic peer pressure left at all. Mind that if something happens to be a tradition but still has a good reason to exist, it should be evaluated like any other idea in terms of being good or bad. I mean removing just one of the reasons to keep this idea. If it is left with zero reasons, it’s out. Otherwise it’s fair game.

He’s certainly popular but not necessarily liked.

It certainly sounds like you have a strong preference how to split preferences into two groups. ;)

Isn’t every rule just a preference of someone influential enough to make it into a rule?