You must log in or register to comment.
Lol to people that believe this is left. This is central. You know there is a party to support these beliefs? It’s called the libertarian party, Google it. You didn’t have to vote for someone who doesn’t represent you as a person regardless of what the Internet says!?
What a legend. Had a similar rant to my Aunt a few months ago
In Europe, Linus is probably right of centre. Just let anyone do whatever except walk around with a gazillion firearms because that’s just insane.
nah even in Europe being trans friendly makes you at least left leaning
we’re not many miles ahead in the societal run towards progress and acceptance, the US is just sprinting the wrong way
It’s pretty hard to make an accurate blanket statement about what the US believes any more. There really are two very different Americas, and the evil one is in power.
And neither gives a shit about the working class
Most of America IS working class, so that’s not true. Neither political party represents the people well, that’s certainly true, although one does so even worse than the other.
True if we’re talking about the divide in the uniparty, though id say the real divide in America is between the wealthy/ruling class (and the sycophants they use their wealth to indoctrinate), and the working class.
Nah it really depends.
While the right tends to be religious and does not really approve anything LGBTQ-related, they’ve learned to behave and to mind their own business, which is actually fine. Respect other people, even if you don’t agree with them and as long as nobody’s getting hurt, we can all live happy lives.
This new wave of “America-style” extreme right lunatics though, that’s a different story. Those entitled fuckers feel they’re allowed to mess with other people’s lives, and they’re due a harsh lesson in civility.
You don’t even have to be trans friendly. He never said he was friendly. You can just not care about what other people do with their lives.
if someone is not outright hostile towards me when they learn i’m trans i consider them friendly :')
In Europe being trans friendly has fuck-all to do with your political leanings on the left-right axis. It’s just USA warping the political discourse with their literally one-dimensional politics.
though i agree it should have fuck all to do with your political leaning, in reality there’s a strong enough correlation that ignoring it would be foolish. As a European trans person if given the choice to out myself to either a group of people i know are left leaning vs a group of people i know are right leaning i’d pick the leftists in a heartbeat
Over here a leftist could easily be someone voting for the communist party - which is conservative as can be, with most supporters being uneducated rural folk, much like GOP voters in the US.
Your best bet would be a socially liberal party, which could be left-leaning green party or right-leaning pirates.
But also, libertarian right is an oxymoron
What the Americans call libertarians have some minority representation in Europe and they’re tolerant of minorities. Not as good as leftists but better than conservatives.
The driving force behind Libertarianism is that the state shouldn’t be able to tell you not to fuck kids. That’s not a popular position, even in Europe.
…wut
That’s what they call libertarianism in the US. Just another coopted label, is all
That capital L makes a huge difference
Ask any libertarian how they feel about age of consent and child labor laws.
LGBT has always been a target.
The “good guys” still (chemically) castrated one of their greatest minds that won the war for ten, just because he happened to like dicks.
Theres a reason people wanted to reduce the victims of the Holocaust to just being Jewish and ignored all the other groups that both sides wanted to persacute.
They did the same thing this time, target LGBT to build the movement and are now expanded to other groups.
Hopefully everyone stands up while we still have the numbers, otherwise they’ll keep chipping away fringe groups.
Watching Linus take a big public dump on someone who deserves it is one of life’s finest guilty pleasures. It’s like a Maya Angelou poem. You can tell he really cared, and meant it, and took some time to get it right.
Reading his words really slams home which side of the political spectrum truly believes in personal freedom and liberty. And it’s not the side that promotes fascism and wants to implement a Christian version of Sharia law under the Ten Commandments.
I got all excited cause I saw that Linus had a mastodon account and I went to follow and saw that I already followed and he hasn’t posted since early last year… ah well, good on ya 2023 Torvalds
Exact same boat…
Despite him not posting, I visit his Mastodon profile from time to time. It has such a cute sea turtle banner. Glad to see that despite him being a kernel developer titan, he still spares a thought for the humble shell programmers too.
I’m sorry, and I don’t want to be disrespectful or rude, but as a person who has no clue about computers I am very surprised the creator of Linux is still alive. I somehow thought he is super old and probably dead by now or at least not using the internet. I’m so sorry for my ignorance.
The cognitive dissonance of just how fast technology has advanced is pretty crazy huh
Your ignorance is adorable, keep it up and don’t stop being inquisitive or apologetic of it.
Thanks man, I’ll try my best
Linux was “invented” in 1991, FYI, and Linus was a student at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#The_creation_of_Linux
Dude wrote the first Linux kernel in grad school in his early-mid 20s. He’s like 50 something now.
Unix predates Linux by a bit, but most of those old guys made it to at least the Obama era.
Vint Cerf is still around, and he got to see himself portrayed in one of the Matrix films.
The people that invented the internet are still using it!
Al Gore is still alive!
Please stop with this. Al Gore said he took the initiative in creating the Internet. As in, he used his abilities as a lawmaker to make the internet possible.
AI Gore claims he invented the Internet is a right wing op.
It’s a joke. I don’t believe Al Gore invented the internet. I don’t believe Al Gore believes he invented the internet.
Right on, fair enough.
Don’t feel shameful, you’re one of the lucky ten thousand
Computer aren’t very old! Most of the pioneers are still alive and kicking
That’s the thing, my dad was one of the first informatics people (computer based algebra in Russia and Germany) and my mom did her thesis on how to design a cigar shaped body in 3D on a computer. But they are in their mid to late 60s now and my dad went from being a professor of IT to “how do I open the internet” so my confusion is based on bias from my family. All his former colleagues also didn’t stay up to date with technology and they worked for an elite university in Germany.
Anyway, good that they are alive and kicking! And glad their kicks are not so random as my folks’.
Ahhh, that’s Germany for you though
I’ve literally seen my dad trying to figure out how to fax some documents in like 2012
Faxes are still pretty normal in Germany in like 2025
A good benchmark is Windows 95, and that was only 30 years ago.
It’s easy to remember because the 95 means 1995. And 19 means the before fore times our ancestors are from.
Ouch. Fucking ouch. We’re right here you know. Looking over your shoulder as you write on that magic tablet. No need to denigrate ghosts.
Some of us are barely even middle aged
Linux is not that old. There’s a reason why the “Actually it’s GNU+Linux…” meme exists, because Linux is built using tools that were already around, he didn’t start entirely from scratch.
spoiler
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
@RedSnt @volvoxvsmarla Well… not all of them. There is <strong>at least one</strong> <a href=“https://chimera-linux.org/”>Linux distribution</a> that’s decided to use a BSD userland instead of a GNU one, so I guess it could be called BSD/Linux…
(and no, I’m not associated with them. Right now I run Ubuntu, but project #3 on my list of personal projects is customizing either CachyOS or OpenMandriva to my taste, complete with custom repos, I haven’t decided yet.)
Oof for someone who isn’t tech savvy this was a hard read but I appreciate it!
My experience with Linux - and as I now know, probably GNU? - is limited to not pressing a button while my dad’s computer at work turned on so that I would end up in not in Windows. He had one amazing game on Linux where some troll had to roll stones (I wish I could find it again). I came to work with him every now and then and was allowed to play while he would half desperately half violently try to get rid of the chaos on his desk, which consisted of about 700 pounds of paper and occasional random paper clips.
I loved these days. And the canteen’s gravy with rice for some reason.
(Edit: this was in the mid to late 90s)
Oof for someone who isn’t tech savvy this was a hard read but I appreciate it!
I’m sorry, I should’ve clarified, that’s the socalled copypasta/meme I mentioned. But now you’re cursed with the knowledge of it existing.
I wish I had 90s memories of linux, but in my family it was all microsoft, from DOS to Windows. My uncle was an electrical engineer and was interested in computers, so our family got some hand-me-down PC’s over time, and I probably played Leisure Suit Larry way too young in the early 90s, but I still believe that typing in text commands is a great way of learning a language.
It wasn’t until 1999 I saw Linux for the first time at school, and later around 2003 I saw it again at a LAN where someone was showing off how fast it could run Unreal Tournament 2003, which was faster than Windows at the time.At least there’s still rice and gravy around :)
He’s 55 years old
You might be thinking of Unix, which is what Linux is based on but not really. Unix was created in the 1960s and for sure the people who created it are passed
Brian kernighan is still writing code, at least as of 2022:
Actually, Ken Thompson and Douglas McIlroy are still alive
dang… in their 80s
guess I should have looked before I said anything
Heh, back in the early 2000s when I was busy reading up on computer history I was very surprised that a lot of Internet standard pioneers and computer science giants were still alive. Like, people from the stone age. This is such a young field.
I seriously thought John McCarthy (creator of Lisp programming language) had reached such a status of existence that he would probably never die. (sadly, he did.)
The Right doesn’t care what people actually believe.
They happily quote MLK on a daily basis.
Ray Bradbury was always anti-fascist, but he called out President Obama because there were no space missions during the Obama terms. After Bradbury died the Right tried to cherry pick quote to make him look like a life long Republican.
Bradbury needed to look closer then because Obama was working on NASA to get it built back up. Trump didn’t magically make rockets available in a couple years. That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.
That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.
Yet somehow, people still think Mr. “We’ll be on Mars by 2025,” who is still launching rockets that explode mid-air, should be allowed to throw out this tried and true method. Surely, the idea of “move fast and break things” is more financially responsible than polluting debris and waste over the country. Fucking monorail salesman…
SpaceX was an accomplishment that got a lot done. Elon might be shit, but he hasn’t destroyed everything he’s touched.
I think he’s always been a sociopathic narcissist. However. It was around the time of the “pedo” comment or early Covid that he completely purged anyone who would tell him no, surrounded himself with yes-men, and fried his brain with drugs.
Pedo comment was the moment I realized what he actually was. I thought he seemed pretty cool before that. My class consciousness wasn’t fully evolved at that point though or I would have realized he had to be a piece of shit to be a billionaire.
Did you never hear about falcon 9 or something? SpaceX’s design process is tried and true. They used it to design the most successful rocket platform ever made. Not only is first stage reuse a massive breakthrough in it’s own right but they pulled it off with arguably the most reliable rocket in history,
Sorry, I should have clarified: the engineers at SpaceX are good, and don’t think they are doing anything wrong. I’m not meaning to ignore or discredit their accomplishments.
My comment was directed towards Musk, specifically. He has a track record of overpromising and underdelivering, throwing out the baby with the bathwater, fighting regulations, and chaos testing in production—across almost all of his ventures. SpaceX succeeded despite him, and he shouldn’t be followed as an example for a leader of any organization that intends to send flying metal full of fuel into the atmosphere.
“The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.”
per Bradbury’s Wikipedia Article
"Bradbury considered himself a political independent.[83] Raised a Democrat, he voted for the Democratic Party until 1968. In 1952, he took out an advertisement in Variety as an open letter to Republicans, stating: “Every attempt that you make to identify the Democratic Party as the party of Communism, as the ‘left-wing’ or ‘subversive’ party, I will attack with all my heart and soul.”[84] However, Lyndon B. Johnson’s handling of the Vietnam War left Bradbury disenchanted, and from 1968 on he voted for the Republican Party in every presidential election with the exception of 1976, when he voted for Jimmy Carter. According to Bradbury’s biographer Sam Weller, Carter’s inept handling of the economy “pushed [Bradbury] permanently away from the Democrats”.[83]
Bradbury called Ronald Reagan “the greatest president” whereas he dismissed Bill Clinton, calling him a “shithead”.[85] In August 2001, shortly before the September 11 attacks, he described George W. Bush as “wonderful” and stated that the American education system was a “monstrosity”.[86] He later criticized Barack Obama for ending NASA’s crewed space flight program.[85]
In 2010, he criticized big government, saying that there was “too much government” in America, and “I don’t believe in government. I hate politics. I’m against it. And I hope that sometimes this fall, we can destroy part of our government, and next year destroy even more of it. The less government, the happier I will be".[85] Bradbury was against affirmative action, condemned what he called “all this political correctness that’s rampant on campuses”, and called for a ban of quotas in higher education.[21][85] He asserted that “[e]ducation is purely an issue of learning—we can no longer afford to have it polluted by damn politics”.[21]”
Yeah that’s uh… that sounds about right. I wonder a lot about that generation.
Would Rod Serling, a humanist at heart, who campaigned to bring black actors onto mainstream TV sets, and always sent a message that the individual should always fight against an oppressive regime… would he too be lost in a sea of republicanism as he got older and the world changed around him?
I’m glad we’ll never know.
And Linux usage skyrockets to record heights.
Oh please give me more Daddy Linux!
To be fair what he’s described is at most Progressive. The left rejects the current economic model as a start. Workers owning the means of production instead of an owner class.
There’s a whole lot of river to swim between fair and equal treatment and full fledged socialism. Not everyone on “the left” sleeps with Karl Marx under their pillow.
Oh definitely. it’s a spectrum, but his post doesn’t go that far left. The idea that any of that is “left wing” is spread by conservatives to make those ideas look radical.
Unfortunately, that is left in Americas overton window
Only because we’ve allowed a bunch of Nazis to control it. This is not normal.
Many here will argue if you aren’t pure you aren’t left in any flavor.
Yes, but did you know they’re probably false?
Yes, but they don’t.
We should feed them to Linus
Aaaand we’ve arrived at UnixSurrealism
They’re obviously false, doesn’t change the landscape though
I don’t really know much about his personal politics, but his work seems to speak pretty loudly about rejecting the idea of software as private property to be bought and sold by capital, which, you know, that’s more than just progressive, even if it’s just in one area.
I’m just commenting on what’s there.
An ally is an ally
Yup, my point is not that he isn’t an ally, it’s that being an ally isn’t inherently leftist.
I have a hard time finding a right wing or centrist ideology that gives a shit about minorities. So, while correlation doesn’t always imply causation, it usually does.
I think the whole left vs right thing is stupid.
Individual views are much more complex than a single left/right axis, so you’re always going to find people on both sides who have views that differ greatly from the major political party on their ‘side’.A ‘progressive’ right winger would care more about preventing the government from deciding what you’re allowed to do, rather than explicitly protecting minorities.
So while they wouldn’t push laws that require businesses to serve everybody indiscriminately, they also wouldn’t push laws that explicitly ban things like gender therapy.Obviously the majority of right wingers in america aren’t progressive though.
There isn’t even a center political party of any consequences in the US. There’s right and far right.
“Well regulated” translated from 1700’s speak just means “in good working order”, not meaning regulated by a bureaucracy issuing permits.
The intention was for state governors not having to rely solely on National Guardsman or Federal government, and can simply pluck a militia ran by civilians who developed a military-like hierarchy in their organization to answer to said governor of the state in order to address issues withinthe states with threats of violence.
“Well regulated” translated from 1700’s speak just means “in good working order”, not meaning regulated by a bureaucracy issuing permits.
Assuming that to be true, what does “militia” mean when translated from 1700’s speak?
A militia in 1700’s speak is simply a group of able-bodied males who own and are trained to use their own personally procured firearms, and serve their local government (village, city, or state). That way the local government doesnt need to pay money out of local city/state funds to arm them and train them and eventually mobilise them to arms.
So, a militia, in your interpretation is:
“A group of able bodied males who posses firearms and who are organized, in good working order, by their local government.”
Or do I have it wrong?
Yes? Do I sound like a lawyer to you? Ask one of them? I’m just parroting what they say. I guess, the answer is yes in your reciprocation.
I don’t know any lawyers personally, so I can’t ask them. It sounds as though you might have some sources you could provide, though, if you’re parroting them? I’d love to read more if you have any links handy. I tried searching the web for the phrase but was unsuccessful.
I did find the Wikipedia article on the word “militia” and it suggests that the accepted “official” definition may have been changed by the “Militia Act of 1903”.
I do find it interesting how one can change the constitution by making official changes to the meanings of language, without a constitutional amendment. That seems concerning.
Dick championed the Militia Act of 1903, which became known as the Dick Act. The 1903 act repealed the Militia Acts of 1795 and designated the militia (per Title 10 of the U.S. Code, Section 311) as two classes: the Reserve Militia, which included all able-bodied men between ages 17 and 45, and the Organized Militia, comprising state militia (National Guard) units receiving federal support.
Sounds like they did not redefine a word as you say, and invented two new ones instead.
Sounds like they were scared individual states and state militias would gain too much power and wanted a militia the Feds could control with Federal money, with thegoal to have some kind of power over the states and not piss off governors of said states and deter them from FAFO.
Thank you for the links and interesting reads… So it sounds like the Militia Act of 1903 is the source of all these issues, and likely can be argued is unconstitutional from the start since they wanted to redefine a word from the Constitution
I didn’t intend to suggest that they redefined the word, I didn’t say that as such, but I agree that they may have made official changes to the word (splitting it, as you say) in some fashion.
It does read a bit like a federal power play meant to consolidate power, though the re-framing of the word “Militia” was not subsequently used as a way to undermine the 2nd amendment, as one might suspect if that were the case. One must wonder if the NRA (established in 1871), or another interested party, had any hand in influencing Charles Dick’s advancement of this legislation.
To me it reads more as a way to protect the 2nd amendment’s “militia” verbiage from scrutiny.
Oh shit, well case closed!
Just like Justice Scalia, you are able to hand-wave away ~200 years of precedent because it suits your pre-held ideology.
~200 years of precedent
I anal, so hopefully you can provide me shit to read about this precedence and help me change my mind.
Dozens of people much smarter than me have written books about it.
Look into the dissenting opinions (and analysis of them) of DC v. Heller. Scalia claimed to be a “traditionalist,” and then completely ignored how the original text had been interpreted since the nation’s inception. He took a lot of heat for it at the time.
He took a lot of heat for it at the time
Oh wow, I bet he got his act together after that one and has had a spotless record since.
What exactly do you think that militia was for? Because I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t to fight against a tyrannical government.
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment
Everything that NPR article mentioned is, without sarcasm, absolutely and factually correct, and legitimately not possible to refute.
Why do I have a feeling that the “without sarcasm” part of your post wasn’t true? But then you didn’t bother refuting any of it…
You likely get that feeling because you may be a cynical loser instigating internet arguments for no reason. I didn’t refute an article i agree with? Sounds like you miss Hexbear, go back to your Chapo club or whatever new slum site you trolls flock to now.
Please provide some evidence that I come even remotely close to the Tankie politics of Hexbear.
If you’re going to insult me (and I never insulted you), at least don’t do it in such an ignorant way. This is literally the internet equivalent of telling an indigenous person to go back to the foreign country they came from.
Please provide some evidence that I come even remotely close to the Tankie politics of Hexbear.
No thanks, I don’t have patience for that endeavor, one could simply peruse our comment history and easily pluck something, no doubt.
If you’re going to insult me (and I never insulted you), at least don’t do it in such an ignorant way. This is literally the internet equivalent of telling an indigenous person to go back to the foreign country they came from.
Very true; either I misunderstood your initial reply to me as a challenge, or you are a troll. Both can also be true.
one could simply peruse our comment history and easily pluck something, no doubt.
One could if you weren’t lying. It’s a really silly lie considering how many lemmy.world communities I moderate. I know you can do better than this with insults. Try harder.
Wait you mean the guy who made a free and open source operating system for everyone to share is left wing!?!?!? WHAT THE FFUUUU
*Kernel
Don’t undermine the fact that Linus also made Git and I’m pretty sure some scuba diving app. Modern day essentials if you ask me!
I don’t think it’s undermining to credit him with exactly what he accomplished. Linus created the kernel, Stallman invented GNU.
Why not just post the copy pasta
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
it’s just copypasta. thanks for posting. but i think it’s just less popular on lemmy
There are a great number of nutjobs running (F)OSS projects, so I wouldn’t assume much about any software maintainer. Also, Linus explicitly only cites upsides to FOSS that pertain to developing the software itself, not to any greater social effort.
Soapbox dude
TempleOS comes to mind…
“I… I was just asking why my WiFi driver isn’t working.”
You jest but it’s because you chose a manufacturer that made a closed-source driver minefield and the volunteer paramedics haven’t been able to get to you yet.
Luckily we don’t need to be quite so diligent with the choice of wifi chips as we used to. Too many still have binary blob drivers from the manufacturer
This NIC is woke.
Since I had it handy, here’s the source meme for the uninitiated:
Ahh…they had
woke_on_lanenabled. That’ll do it.It’s the dang magic packets in the water supply
It’s turning the packets EF!
I think he isn’t a leftist, but just reasonable
I see a lot of overlap from where I’m standing.
In the USA the republicans simply are such morons currently that anything reasonable appears to be leftist.
I’m center-right in Austria but US-americans would call me a woke communist (and in many regards I’m more leftist than the democrats).
Maybe it’s just the .world folks but yeah somehow “leftist” on this site has come to mean “left of the American center”…
All it takes to be a leftist these days is to not go out of your way every day to be a raging cunt.
I’m sorry, is my BEING AN ASSHOLE triggering you???
Snowflake.
(do NOT make fun of my $1,000.00 USD trump branded FREEDOM sneakers or I’ll get upset 😡 they were NOT a scam)
Basic human decency. That’s seriously all it takes.
As long as you ignore .ml, hexbear, and -grad, sure I guess. Ime there’s cunts everywhere, ymmv.
Or at least show some remorse if you do!
Just how fucking dense do you have to be in order to be surprised that a man who created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free, might be a leftist?
created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free
He didn’t created it alone and “then” gave it away for free. Since it’s begging Linux was free and that created a community who made it the most popular OS.
Yes. It’s called summarizing. Obviously it’s a bit more complicated. I’m not writing an essay on the history of Linux here.
We would all settle for you not making idiotic comments that mislead anyone who isn’t already informed about this, you might know them as “the vast majority of people”
That comment isn’t misleading, unless you interpret “creator” as “sole contributor”
Well it’s due tomorrow by the end of class, Mr. WoodScientist, so you better get cracking.
“…or as I like to call it gnu plus linux…”
There’s some libertarians in the FOSS community as well, so it’s not a guarantee, but yeah, generally you’ll find that correlation.
In my experience the Foss community tends towards the “legal weed and less cops” style of libertarianism and less the “police exist to protect my right to 3 12 year old wives from the tyranny of criticism” style.
I can generally get along with the “coercion bad” libertarians better than with the “abolish the government because rules shouldn’t exist” crowd.Oh yeah, definitely. A lot of the people that pretend to be libertarians are actually fascists (see Musk, Thiel, Ellison), and it’s ironic that all of these people made their fortunes building on top of FOSS stacks. And even though they owe a lot to it, they still don’t understand why anyone would give away their software for free.
Kernel. GNU is the operating system.
I’m sorry Richard, I’m not calling it GNU plus Linux no matter how accurate it is.
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
There it is. 🥲
I use Chimera Linux. None of what you said applies.
It’s a famous copypasta
It’s actually a sandwich.
Good thing, too; I thought it was a song .
I never know wether to upvote or downvote this comment
I do. It is incorrect.
How so you differentiate with non-Linux GNU systems?
The kernel is the OS
Yes, yes, and it’s NT/Windows or as I’ve taken to calling it NT+Windows…
This point is pedantic and tired to the point that it has become an infamous copypasta.
It’s also, at least as stated here, not even technically correct. A kernel is an operating system all on it’s own. It just can’t do much.
GNU just provides the software that the user interacts with.
Additionally, there are a number of Linux distros that are entirely free of GNU software.
Just about everyone understands what you mean when you call Linux an OS. The pedantry is unneeded.
GNU is not even a requirement.
Look at Void Linux. Look at Alpine Linux. Look at Chimera Linux.
MUSL instead of Glibc. Clang instead of GCC. Alternative userlands. More and more Linux distros arrive with these traits everyday (many more than I listed).
TBF, linux is not a requirement either. You can run pretty much all the same software on BSD as you would on a typical linux system.
I think the only thing present in all *nix distributions is Xorg, so what you call linux is actually X11/Linux, or as I’ve taken to calling it, X11+Linux…
You can even go full GNU if you’re willing to live on the bleeding edge and run GNU hurd (now at version 0.9)
i cant believe this guy invented popcorn :o
Right wingers are extremely stupid and don’t really understand what the left stands for, they fall for all fox news strawman arguments and rage bait.
This is unfortunately true of both sides.
For example, conservatives think pro- choicers are callous baby-killers who only care about abortion because it allows them to “whore around” without consequences. Liberals on the other hand, think pro-lifers are misogynists who want to ban abortion because banning it will hurt women and because they want to make the country more like The Handmaid’s Tale.
…and leftists know that the “abortion debate” is culture warfare injected into the less-educated by billionaires to distract from class warfare.
I was just using that as an example.
Another great one is immigration. Liberals thinks conservatives want to restrict immigration because they hate foreigners. Conservatives want to stop immigration because the job market sucks and has sucked since 2008.
To consolidate posts:
Liberals on the other hand, think pro-lifers are misogynists who want to ban abortion because banning it will hurt women and because they want to make the country more like The Handmaid’s Tale.
None of their stated reasons against abortion hold any water. There are clear ways to reduce abortion, such as comprehensive sex education and widespread availability of birth control. Since conservatives obviously are against those things, we can only conclude their reasons are bullshit. Cruelty fits the data perfectly.
Conservatives want to stop immigration because the job market sucks and has sucked since 2008.
Except there is no real link between those two, and even economics framed in conservative terms disproves it. Labor generates profit, which should mean every new worker adds to the economy, not takes away. That is, the resources they use (food, housing, etc.) are offset by the extra resources they produce in their work. There is not some fixed amount of labor the economy can have, and anything beyond that is parasitic overflow.
So again, if the stated reasons are clearly bullshit, then we are left with a question of why they’re doing it, anyway. Cruelty fits the data perfectly.
we can only conclude their reasons are bullshit
Tbf this isn’t entirely true. Hanlon’s Razor states “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,” their reasons could be bullshit (as in intentionally, maliciously deceptive), or they could just be dumb enough not to connect the dots. In fact it could be (and likely is) both. The leaders at the top are maliciously lying about their reasoning, and the base is dumb enough to believe the lies, never underestimate the dumb shit people will earnestly believe due to cult brainwashing since birth, you ever talk to a born-in scientologist or Jehova’s Witness? Fucking wild. People telling me dinosaurs absolutely are planted by the devil to test faith and that OT levels are in any way real and shit, fucking crazy out here dude, there’s even a murderous vegan cult called the Zizians now.
In short: Dumb people be dumbing.
I am a former born-in JW; over a decade out at this point.
You’re not entirely wrong, but the leaders at the top are lying, and that’s all that really matters. They know these policies don’t work, but pursue them anyway.
The reason why the job market sucks is that unions got defanged and international capital movement freed from the 80s onwards.
That’s why life for working people took 3 steps backwards compared to our parents and grandparents who could buy a house, go on holidays and have a boat on a factory wage. While we are going to have trillionaires soon and the only thing that’s cheaper is the fuel of capitalism: telecoms and wages.
The problem has never been another wage earner - the problem is pitting us against each other and us taking the bait.
I agree with you on the unions, but the other issue is that a lot of jobs have been outsourced over the years. Unfortunately, those jobs probably aren’t coming back.
Well yes, but how did we get here? The same forces that brought us are still working to keep wage slavey alive and well.
Free movement of capital, weakened unions and ceaseless propaganda pitting people against each other (welfare queens, immigrants are taking your jobs, eating the cats and dogs, work harder and you’ll be rich too, these other people are lazy, stupid, bad genes, wrong religion, the rich are better/smarter than you etc) - that’s how that happened.
There’s only one enemy and it’s not other wage earners.
Conservatives wanted to stop immigration long before 2008…
Democrats too.
pro-lifers are misogynists who want to ban abortion because banning it will hurt women and because they want to make the country more like The Handmaid’s Tale.
Are we just going to ignore the fact that this one is actually true though? Like, look at what the right is doing in the US…
Or do you mean this isn’t accurate because the right actually wants to ban abortion as a way to control women and keep them under their thumbs (like trying to ban no fault divorce) by removing as much agency as they can?
I actually know pro-lifers. I used to be a pretty ardent one myself. I used to be the sort that believed in no exceptions. Pro-lifers, or a least, a lot of them, don’t see it as a means of controlling women or being detrimental in any way to them. They think they’re helping the unborn and women by preventing abortions. They really do believe that. I’m sorry that you never got to meet any pro-lifers, or at least ones who aren’t misogynistic.
I think we know that those on the life begins at conception side have been lied to. That they’re not out to harm women.
But the men and women in power on that side are callous bastards who don’t care that their law has already killed people
