They say Twitter has 'harmful content' and then move to Bluesky????
Bluesky has some of the worst images and content I've ever seen on the Internet. People regularly talk about murdering government officials and threatening people, without getting banned.
It has nothing to do with the content they feel is 'offensive and harmful'.
*Update: I'm getting auto-downvoted by bots. Good thing I'm good at botting too :-))))))))))))))))
This doesn't make any sense as there is not a linux desktop but multiples and the major ones have been less buggy than windows for the most part of the last 20 years.
Hardware support is where Linux used to struggle. Nowadays things aren't perfect but much better. Basically it means you need to figure out which hardware to buy based on available support, before making the purchase.
I am willing to concede this might be true, but I personally have never checked Linux support before through 3 generations of desktops. Intel/Nvidia twice and then AMD/AMD.
Until you get some Windows apologist who points out that their proprietary touchscreen that has multiple layers of DRM doesn't have Linux drivers and therefore Linux doesn't have good hardware support.
You have to be careful in the same way that you can't expect to wipe an M series Mac and stick Windows on it.
Apple devices have multiple layers of touchscreen DRM, but most other devices are just lacking drivers, because there are far too many devices for five unpaid interns to write drivers for all of them.
What desktop and which distro? In the past, there have been times where a bug showed up for me over the years, especially before 2018. Currently tho, Debian 13 + KDE - zero issues.
Debian, Ubuntu, Suse, and Fedora have had a bug free desktop experience for years. If you stick to the default repositories and use last year's hardware everything just works.
Honestly, that’s a 2016 argument. I flipped a few contact centers over to Linux desktops and had very few issues. If anything we probably spent 5x the resources getting Windows 11 certified internally.
Microsoft knows it, but they don’t care about windows. When IBM started offering Macs to employees, they figured out that the support burden was very low, significantly lower than windows, even with users having years of windows experience.
Intune was supposed to be the answer to that, making Windows management MDM like. But for their most entrenched enterprise customers, they can’t really switch without co-managing with Configuration Manager. Most of the people behind that product are laid off or otherwise attrited, as there’s no path to a subscription service.
I'd stupidly assume that having a choice and control over the experience is empowering, and watching a couple of YouTube videos titled "which Linux distribution is best for me" isn't too hard?
Or is it in your opinion?
If it is maybe they better stay on the "shut up and do how I say, puppet" OS.
For one thing, as an administration insider says, it’s a twist on previous efforts that funded “specific causes”.
For another, most foreign funding was usually bipartisan otherwise it would have been killed by subsequent presidents from the opposite party.
For another, I’ve not heard of other such funding that was “causing consternation among allies”.
For another, “ Another senior Reform figure said they had been told that Rogers “had a state department slush fund to get Maga-style things going in various places”, adding that she was keen to “fund European organisations to undermine government policies””……undermining government policies of allies was likely never done on this broad scale (even if the US may have intervened on specific policies).
Why don’t you provide some examples of “Democrats funding into liberal NGOs and charities” that cause so much consternation among allies?
> How is this any diffent than when Democrats put finding into liberal NGOs and charities?
For one, I have to repeat yet again that wrong plus wrong doesn't equal right it equals twice as wrong. It's time to learn proper math already!
For another, what NGOs did the Dems fund? Do you have links so we can compare the causes supported by the Dems and the nationalism which is now being pushed inside and out.
All causes aren't the same, they can be very different as the current case shows.
Nationalism is a tool of destruction which works both domestically and internationally, those who know and think about history and some recent events understand that, it isn't new or a secret - that's why many European countries are spooked and they aren't mistaken.
They are responding to the comment above that asks why this funding is different than previous administrations. Generally, it breaks with many long held (post ww2) diplomatic approaches to american soft power. Instead of engendering good will with our allies (as opposed to the world as a whole mind you) it seeks to insert the thin edge of the wedge.
As long as it doesn't involve just giving them money. This experiment has been done in Africa for as long as I can remember and there's only more poverty and a higher birth rate.
"without telling poorer people that they should be happy we're offering them the jobs we don't want to do ourselves"
A corrupt government is usually the reason a country doesn't prosper. There's no jobs because businesses end up just getting ripped off and move elsewhere (along with anyone smart). What's left is a broken infrastructure and abject poverty.
> A corrupt government is usually the reason a country doesn't prosper
You're probably ignoring the centuries of corporate rule in India that systematically removed wealth to Britain, and which left behind a traumatised and humiliated population that was allowed to play in a game of capitalism they didn't start with the cards already stacked against them.
"The wealth available in the world right now is completely unfathomable, and its mostly going to ads, privacy invasion, burning massive amounts of energy to make fake videos and articles and more adware, etc. Its not wrong to think "is something wrong with having droves of poor people wading through our shit so they don't starve?""
Why is the sole blame on countries other than India. We should be focusing on the government of India and why the system there creates a society with a much larger percentage of poverty than many other parts of the world.
"Similar to how the coal mining companies were happy to watch miners die in the mines from blacklung, and their services were indeed useful, and they were quite proud of it."
How is this similar? Nobody is dying from looking at terrible content.
"why aren't they using a clearly better alternative for those people?"
This article is about the better alternative. They aren't physically risking their lives every day to make a living.
> Why is the sole blame on countries other than India
You can blame India all you want; Modi is very much due for criticism, his political leadership is pitiful and merits no quarter from Western governments or otherwise.
But the Russian Federation doesn't care, they've got crude to process. The Knesset won't convene to denounce their enemy's enemy. The US loves buying cheap oil and siphoning Indian labor. They'll blame India right alongside you all day long, but they won't ever stop supporting their broken system. India's suffered from this for the better part of a century and it's becoming apparent that foreign influence is the issue.
"If you’re largely getting your news from Twitter, you might not even know that Trump is unpopular, because you wouldn’t even see a lot of the backlash."
You can't go anywhere without seeing someone say something bad about Trump. However, all other platforms are heavily biased toward the Left, which isn't real life either.
Even posting a hint of right-leaning ideas on Blue sky or most subreddits and you're account is instantly banned. When these bans don't happen on platforms like Twitter, the percentage of right-wing content is higher.
This tells you more about the current state of social media platforms (the Left supports banning and censorship). Sites like CNN removed their comment sections, but most left-leaning websites heavily censor them as well.
Left-wing popularity can't survive without censorship.
On Facebook, I've seen some artists/graphic designers railing against AI. Companies don't care if you created it or if they can use AI for 90% less money and time an create something that works.
When software piracy destroyed my brother's small software company a decade ago, and music piracy forced all of my indy music friends out of the business, nobody cared.
Do you care now? When you are forced out of your profession and can't make a living?
In a way, I'm happy. I can now give you reasons why you should be sharing your hard-work (for free) with the world through AI training data and give you a horse-and-buggy analogy.
Bluesky has some of the worst images and content I've ever seen on the Internet. People regularly talk about murdering government officials and threatening people, without getting banned.
It has nothing to do with the content they feel is 'offensive and harmful'.
*Update: I'm getting auto-downvoted by bots. Good thing I'm good at botting too :-))))))))))))))))
Farewell,
I will rule from the shadows once again.
reply