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.

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.

Yes. It's called summarizing. Obviously it's a bit more complicated. I'm not writing an essay on the history of Linux here.

"...or as I like to call it gnu plus linux..."

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!

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.

It's actually a sandwich.

i cant believe this guy invented popcorn :o

I'm sorry Richard, I'm not calling it GNU plus Linux no matter how accurate it is.

I never know wether to upvote or downvote this comment

How so you differentiate with non-Linux GNU systems?

The kernel is the OS

TempleOS comes to mind...

Soapbox dude

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!

Basic human decency. That's seriously all it takes.

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)

Or at least show some remorse if you do!

As long as you ignore .ml, hexbear, and -grad, sure I guess. Ime there's cunts everywhere, ymmv.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Well. He's gotten better.

I think he really struggled understanding that he was seen as a leader, and that people were modelling his behavior because he was setting the standard. Once he realized that, his criticisms became more... measured.

Must... Resist... TVTropes... Link...

Idk, it's more of a Dr. Cox from Scrubs situation. Clearly not the "villain" but definitely abusive on his way to do good works.

I guess it's "Jerk With a Heart of Gold" but it's not very zippy.

makes you wonder what the reply would have been like 10 years ago. probably something along the lines "just breathing the same air as you already makes me feel stupider..."

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.

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...

Bro, idk how you are still Right-Wing then. What are these Right-Wing values that you hold?

If you think you're on "the right" and are not advocating actively and persistently for Trump's removal from office, you're a fucking useless moron.

Of course there's a spectrum. In the US, the spectrum only applies to the populace, though, as the politicians themselves are behaving so polarized that there only exists "the right" (far-right culture warriors) and "the left" (center-right with lip service to the left).

Then you are either uninformed or somewhere the right is significantly less corrupt

Everyone needs an asshole otherwise you're just full of shit.

Not a good reason for you, this is something that is only subjective lol

Since I had it handy, here's the source meme for the uninitiated:

Ahh...they had woke_on_lan enabled. That'll do it.

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

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'.

Al Gore is still alive!

The web, not the internet.

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.

A hint is Unix time counts seconds from 1970-01-01

Thanks man, I'll try my best

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)

@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.)

Actually, Ken Thompson and Douglas McIlroy are still alive

Brian kernighan is still writing code, at least as of 2022:

https://arstechnica.com/...

Are they?

The pandemic is a lie/is exaggerated -> there is no reason to wear a mask -> why is the gouvernment trying to make people wear masks, they must be hiding something

This is my uneducated take :

Conservatives have been taught to follow the leaders in their environment, without questions (see religion)

It gives their leaders a lot of power and thus, there is a lot of incentives to become a leader through whatever means possible. It gives leaders power and influence.

So comes along an issue and a non-conservative authority tells people they should do X. Conservatives leaders want more power and they hinge on that thing to gain more visibility and thus more power.

The other conservatives see that their leader is against, and so they take their leaders stance without question and hate that thing too.

Conservatives leader will say whatever they can without really really caring if that is true or not (remind you of someone?)

It is a lot easier to rile up people with negative emotions and tribalism, so the conservative leaders use hate and fear to further their strength and influence.

Maybe I'm drawing a connection that isn't there, but I equate this with the behaviour in some circles of being suspicious of people who don't partake in drugs, drinking, corruption, debauchery, etc. It's kind of like you can't trust people unless they have some vice, or at least an "edge" to them.

But maybe this behaviour is not related to this "deugmens" or "gutmensch" labeling.

derogatory

I suspect a lot of derogatory terms across many cultures/languages are generally rooted in sarcasm. Pointing out the irony/oxymoron in the term just makes them feel/act even more self-righteous.

I live in buttfuck nowhere - France.

We need cars because the railways were deemed not profitable. We need cars because investment in busses is often very limited (depending on where you live). We need cars because village markets are dying and we then have to go to the supermarket the town over.

We need cars because of the capitalist atomisation of society.

And even then, the vast majority of our trips are very short (< 40' round trip'). The car we need the most is a very small, kinda lowtech electric one. But those don't exist as much...

In our 750 people village, I think we'd need about 1 car for every 3 to 5 families and 3 trucks.

TL;DR: Rural people need cars. But we don't need big ones for most of our usage. We need better public transportation. Personal car ownership is dumb and wasteful.

I would associate most of these concepts with GNU more than Linux.

Richard Stallman is a hero.

Torvalds isn't half bad either

collaborative and free to access and use

Except GPL which is literally "either join our socialist software revolution or fuck off and make your own software".

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.

Many here will argue if you aren't pure you aren't left in any flavor.

I'm just commenting on what's there.

Yup, my point is not that he isn't an ally, it's that being an ally isn't inherently leftist.

Liberals are pro-capitalism, which is the ultimate mechanism for inequality.

"Neoliberalism" isn't a pejorative, it's a political philosophy that has dominated the Western world for about 50 years, though it has roots much further back. It is a philosophy embraced by both Republicans and Democrats. It's about privatization of services, lowering taxes, and deregulating corporations. It's why we have for profit healthcare in the US, for example.

Recommend reading the book The Quiet Coup by Mehrsa Baradaran. Neoliberalism isn't benign, could be considered akin to modern centrism, and above all else works to protect capitalism and the status quo in predictable ways that allow for exploitation. Which is exactly why corporate monarchy is now taking over our country in place of capitalism.

I agree that many who vote for liberals believe those things, but those are not the goal of liberal parties. The historical meaning of liberalism was the same as what is called neoliberalism today. Calling it a derogatory term is just pretending to be a victim. There IS such an ideology as "belief in inequality based on wealth" and that includes the right to survive through access to healthcare. That is reality.

You argue as if good arguments win, and ideology matters - it doesn't work that way. Ideology is merely a tool. There is only power, or money that you can exchange for power. And those who desire nothing except power have a competitive advantage to gain more power and shape the world over people who want other things. There is a selection process that has been going for decades that precludes normal people like us two.

Politicians in the US might write some other virtues on their flags, or they might even delude themselves to believe them - that is actually best. But when the chips are down, only those who pursue power gain more power. I believe this could be scientifically proven with game theory and a simulation.

What you are doing is kind of denying that economic power (or capital, or billionaires) have an overwhelming influence on politics and policies. If you say that the conservatives or democrats or whoever does this or that for ideological reasons, you deny political reality and obscure paths to improve things. We need transparency and better tools and countermeasures to these mechanisms.

Politicians are chosen by capitalists among thousands of candidates, and only the fringe that happen to fit into their plans are funded. Those who want power above anything else and who have neoliberal tendencies. The useful idiots to capitalists.

So no, neoliberalism is not a derogatory term that should be avoided. It's reality. Or how else do you explain Elon Musk running DOGE?

No, 'cause the /s cheapens the experience of good sarcasm.

And a ward against the evil eye

/s is the worst thing to happen to Internet discussion, at least recently.

It's not gatekeeping, none of the opinions shared here by Linus are categorically leftist. The person retweeting him is erroneously putting him into a box, or knows more about his full ideology than he's shared in the tweet.

It's not gatekeeping to point out that 'leftist' historically doesn't mean 'left of center'. It's used as a reductive - but that's the nature of trying to reduce political ideologies to a single term - label for ideologies that are anti-capitalist. Nothing Linus said in this post points to him being anti-capitalist, he only commented on social issues.

He might still be a leftist, I'll give you that, but this post doesn't really show that.

Because the direction "left" doesn't actually have any inherent relationship to political ideologies, but people strive for some kind of ideological purity, especially to draw a contrast with a fundamentally unjust society?

https://bigthink.com/the-present/yuri-bezmenov/

The answer is that it's complicated.

To keep out fascists and centrists, quite obviously.

The revolution eats their own children. No matter how left you are, someone is more left than you.

I'm going to start using this

I like dozer because it not only suggests they're asleep, but it also suggests bulldozer, which is what the people they voted for are doing to the country and world.

Autocorrect for 'wokeness'?

Haha I totally missed that and I even proofread. That'll learn me to post in a precaffeinated state.

I mean you're right, but January/February is always a low ebb for the spice level in my life.

Wow, that task force sounds like it does something very different from what it actually is supposed to do.

~200 years of precedent

I anal, so hopefully you can provide me shit to read about this precedence and help me change my mind.

Everything that NPR article mentioned is, without sarcasm, absolutely and factually correct, and legitimately not possible to refute.

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.

atheism isn't a lack of belief. Atheists belive that there is no god. Someone who doesn't believe in either or is an agnostic.

I agree with all you said, but I only disagree that I don't believe that 'hero worship' is rightwing-exclusive.
I also love these two examples you mentioned of PolyMC and Mincraft boycotting and branching away from inhumanity