I suspect you're thinking of a scene from Man of Steel. This is from the recently released Superman. And in this movie ::: spoiler spoiler he is put in a concentration camp, while being told that he isn't entitled to due process. Escaping is a lot harder than in Man of Steel. :::
If only he had done something early to protect Columbia students and California farm workers. He did nothing, thinking he would never get deported because he is white and believes in truth, justice, and the Amerikkkan way. By not defending Julian Assange, he left Clark Kent open to arrest.
Judaism is not Zionism, and those who argue they are one and the same are being fundamentally dishonest. Yet collectively, Jews are often held responsible when the world's only Jewish state claims to act in our name.
I've had pet mice, they're pretty neat too - the less timid ones can actually be trained to do tricks and some of them were trained to go back to their cage if they had to pee while out. They're smarter than people give them credit for, they're as smart as the dumbest rats they're just a lot smaller so they're more afraid of things.
Whereas the hamsters my friends had when I was a kid were basically all bitey assholes, but they were definitely poorly socialized.
Bloodthirsty british and european settlers, greedy for land, wiped out hundreds of native tribes, each with rich cultures, art, languages, and beliefs. And most of this happened less than 150 years ago.
Clearing an entire continent of peoples is unprecendented in history, and what's worse, is that it's still ongoing, and no one has had to account for this earth-shattering crime.
I know who you are and I know you won't bother to read into this but for anyone else interested. Most of the native population was wiped out before the first English got here. Disease spreads and a bunch of Spaniards started spreading diseases in the 1500s.
Very true, but Spaniards did not know about the lack of immunity from European diseases and never had that intention for erasure of Indigenous. The English, that colonized 2 centuries after the Spaniards, used European diseases as an additional tool for complete genocide on indigenous.
The Spanish 100% knew. What pipe are you smoking from friend? They would intentionally trade items from the people in their camp that had smallpox to the natives. That's how the initial outbreak on the coast started in 1518. They explicitly knew this would happen because they first exploited Cuba and the other New world Islands and found out there in the 1490s.
Case? You seem confused, I said the natives were mostly gone before the English stepped foot in the new world. That's a historical fact read a book. I'm not saying anything else. I have no case.
Germ theory was unknown then and those Spaniards lacked understanding of contagion, well I'm lying, the people then knew about contagion with blood and corpses but not through items like air or blankets. The disease spread, while catastrophic it was fully unintentional. The only accounts like the famed Bartolomé de las Casas described the diseases as "divine punishment" or "mysterious plague", never as a warfare tool.
However with the British, again more than 2 centuries later, there was knowledge and intent as per Jeffrey Amherst and Colonel Henry Bouquet discussing it "Could it not be contrived to send the smallpox among the disaffected tribes?" "I will try to inoculate them with some blankets…" during the Siege of Fort Pitt (1763).
Diseases did not conquer hundreds of tribes. The history of the new world is a one of campaigns of war and conquest against indigenous peoples. The fact that many are ignorant of this history is part of the whitewashing project. I linked some audiobooks below so you can learn this history.
If the nazis won, they would teach you about the shoah in exactly the same way western nations teach you about the colonization of the americas.
Disease played a major role in the European's ability to conquer those tribes. It's not an either/or situation. It is true that the "Americas" that the English started colonizing had already been devastated by the contagions brought by the Spanish. The English undoubtedly would have found it far more difficult and maybe even impossible to conquer those hundreds of tribes had they not first been so severely depopulated by pandemic. Acknowledging this does not absolve or even lessen the atrocities committed by the English.
/s. Unfortunately your rhetoric does not follow party line. Please censor yourself. (I do appreciate that one of you is a historian and not a party liner)
The upper estimates are around 90%. It's likely lower. But even an order of magnitude like that is not "wiped out". Millions of people still lived on the land
My brother if there had a hundred people in your town you lost 70 to 90% of your people and then there were only 25 to 11 of you left alive I'd say your group was obliterated. I do not argue that there were still millions of natives left alive, but there were roughly 60 to 100 million natives prior to the first explorers arriving.
I have never said this. It's nice to know that you have a vivid imagination. Maybe you can use that big imagination to tell Putin a nice story and he can start to care about the ukranians.
Holocaust deniers also claim that most victims died due to diseases. The destruction and enslavement of natives did in fact cause their high mortality due to diseases.
At first I thought I agree with the post and now I'm second-guessing what OP is trying to convey. This is an amazingly ambiguous picture when posted without further commentary.
I remember reading the selfish gene maybe a decade ago... iirc a meme is really just any idea, that like a gene, can replicate and spread, and has a "fitness" to its environment that means it either spreads easier, or dies out. It applies to any idea / mental construct, from art, music, even to sayings, philosophies or moods.
The past can’t be changed but we need to be aware of the atrocities of the past. But now it can be prevented and something can be done to stop it but world powers are sitting on their asses to fill their pockets. We should be learning from history not repeating it.
The ambiguity of the meme format makes it seem like rage engagement bait
But now it can be prevented and something can be done to stop it but world powers are sitting on their asses to fill their pockets. We should be learning from history not repeating it.
If you don't see how both of these western settler colonial projects are linked, then I'm sure you haven't learned from history. The fact that many westerners are equally ignorant is why we're repeating it in 2025.
Huh. I hope we can get to understand the post by talking about it. I'm not trying to be condescending or annoying. I'm trying to see what you see. What did you think at first the image showed and how did the comment about tankies lead you to second-guess?
I mean, they're trying to say that the terrible colonialism practiced by the European-based American people against the native Americans is happening again in Israel, which is definitely a good point to be made. We're well past the ability to stop the atrocities committed by America in the past, but we're able to stop Israel today. The same idea applies to the terrible treatment of non-while populations in America today by ICE and other agencies, while we're on the topic of preventable atrocities.
"Ah but you see, a long time has passed by! There's generations [of settler-colonialists] that have already lived through these times, and the people of today have nothing to do with their past!"
Motherfucker, landback means the LAND which is rightfully the Indigenous' is taken BACK, and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you're currently a part of.
They're going to say the exact same shit for Palestine if it's allowed to be festered long enough by settler-colonialists, as if it already hasn't been festered.
I call this the finders keepers rule of colonialism. The western supremacists think that as long as you
Kill a large enough percentage of the native population, and
Wait long enough
Then the finders keepers rule kicks in, and you get to keep anything you stole. They even will yell "no ethnostates!!" at indegenous peoples they evicted and stole land from.
The main point is that its not for anyone but indigenous peoples to determine what they want to do with their land.
I agree that colonizers have harmed indigenous people, but find the argument anyone has a birth right claim to property proposterous. As Proudhon proclaimed, "Property is theft!". I expect any revolution toward anarchy to remove property from the owning class.
I am less knowledgable than you about "land back". How does "land back" differ from other ethno nationalist movements like "blood and soil"?
There are people still alive who grew up in residential schools. There are even people alive who knew survivors of the Trail of Tears. The genocide of Native Americans really wasn't that long ago and (like you said) still ongoing.
Obama forced an oil pipeline through indigenous land in what? 2014?
That doesn't really make sense if you're not first-gen; there is nowhere to go "back" to, if you were born there. What place does someone belong in more than the place they were born? Do you think that some far-away land with a different culture, that hates immigrants, would accept someone in just because of blood relation?
Land back means the ownership of the land is returned; it does not mean the expulsion of non-indigenous people. Maybe you should get off your armchair and go to a protest.
Maybe you should get off your armchair and go to a protest
(I admit I probably violated rule 1; my apologies to @Samsuma for that.)
What I mean by this is that people who are actually involved in these issues out on the street talk very differently than people do on lemmy. Or reddit for that matter. I go to some Indigenous issues protests in British Columbia now and then, usually it's street blockades; "land back" is a very common rallying call. I've chatted with many protesters; what they mean by this is "the landlords should be indigenous" essentially. And also that much more territory should be transferred back to the reserves. Some people even put the goal at replacing the government entirely. But nobody is talking about ethnic cleansing.
By finders keepers, what I thought you meant was "it was done in the past, by different people, so it's not a problem that can be solved anymore." That's different from "we have to completely erase all people descended from settlers/colonists."
Hi there I am one of those people with over 20 years of direct action work on this topic and some of my best friends are Lakota, if they wanted me to leave with the rest of my settler kin I would honor that and keep fighting for revolution elsewhere God knows if I got sent back to Ireland or Wales I would have plenty work to do. You should think very hard about why you are so defensive about this.
That said chances are if you actually put in the work and shut the fuck up about impracticality or whatever else excuse you use, you'd probably be allowed to stay. Hell my friends family invited me to a wedding out at Pine Ridge but sadly I could not afford the travel expenses to attend because my last trip out there to help them with the sun dance cost me a couple grand.
In conclusion stop white-splaning land back it is not up to us what it means.
Also to the point of "go to a protest" I would ask you to go to a reservation if they want your help and do something more meaningful than some toothless march.
I didn't give impracticality as an excuse. I just don't agree with ethnic cleansing. Everyone has a right to live where they were born. Furthermore, it just doesn't track with the indigenous people I actually know in real life. I can't imagine any of them wanting to expel most of their friends.
do something more meaningful
I help with language revitalization on occasion, there are places coders like myself can help there. I'll admit it's not exactly a full-time job, but it has its value. But in general I don't want to bother people who live on reserves. Regardless, I reject the notion that you need to actually be helping in order to have an opinion.
And also that much more territory should be transferred back to the reserves.
Correct and it leads to a simple question: If the tribal governments decide that all land claims and titles in the county upon which your house resides are null and void, they're beginning a land reclamation project, current title holders have no rights to the land, what are you going to do? Fight them? Claim ethnic cleansing? It's their land, not yours.
Right. That's my point. Land back ≠ ethnic cleansing. I'm not sure we actually disagree with each other? The comment I posted, which is now deleted, was entirely just saying "no, land back does not mean ethnic cleansing" in response to @Samsuma.
what are you going to do
I don't have any rights to the land to begin with. I'm not a home-owner. What would be different? If nobody gives me a home, then I'm homeless. As a ~socialist, I don't believe we should have homelessness, but that's not what you asked
I didn't suggest ethnic cleansing in the meaning of land back, nor does land back suggest ethnic cleansing. ONE of the scenarios of land back means you (as in the settler populus) would have to start pack up your stuff and leave, if this is what the Indigenous would want with their land reclaimed, then it's not up to you or me.
This is of course highly, highly unlikely and as others and I have mentioned in other threads, the Indigenous majority would actually realistically want people to stay, most probably including you (idk, I'm not a USian, never mind a Native American), if this is what you're worried about.
If I was a USian, I'd thank my lucky stars that they'd be this kind and HAVE BEEN despite them sustaining centuries of one of, if not the most brutal ethnic cleansing, land desecration and genocide, which is still ongoing to this day.
if this is what the Indigenous would want with their land reclaimed, then it’s not up to you or me.
I was responding to you saying it necessarily means packing up and leaving. That is our point of contention. I agree with you that land back could lead to an ethnic cleansing in theory, though I agree also it's very unlikely. Perhaps I misunderstood you, but this is what you said that made me think you meant something else:
Motherfucker, landback means [...] you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.
also
if this is what you’re worried about.
(a) I'm Canadian btw; US isn't the only colonial country. and (b) I'm not worried about it, no. It's a completely absurd and very improbable notion. Indeed, I often have to remind people who are worried about it that white genocide/ethnic cleansing/whatever is a total myth and conspiracy theory. So I'm shocked when I see on lemmy somebody talk about it as though it's a real thing.
Not just reddit but very lib brain behavior. They need material support for people on the rez not some cracker with a white savior complex holding a sign at a rally.
By all means sure protest and use it to get people to do something more but telling Dessalines who literally created this platform and did more actual work than most of us ever had to get off their chair and go protest strikes me as lost liberal behavior.
@Nakoichi@hexbear.net that was actually to me. But even then, assuming I'm not already engaging in real-life activism to downplay the point I was making isn't really a valid criticism of the point, but ig looking at other threads you seem to get that by now so it's w/e really.
It came across wrong. I was inferring that you weren't doing real-life activism because I don't encounter people with the opinion I thought you had (that land back = ethnic cleansing) out on the streets in real life. But yeah, in another thread, it turns out I misunderstood you to begin with.
Do you think that some far-away land with a different culture, that hates immigrants, would accept someone in just because of blood relation?
That's not the Indigenous peoples' problem. They might even think it's poetic justice for how European culture treated them. Europe, for its part, also has no right to complain about the influx of North Americans because they started this whole thing.
Are you familiar with "moral desert"? I'm legitimately quite curious about your system of ethics. I don't really believe in moral desert myself; instead, we should try to improve the lives of everyone, and in particular increase equality and if necessary equity.
In my opinion, land back is important because it will help bring equality back into balance. It's just one of many steps to repairing society into an equitable state though. The "righting" of historical wrongs is not necessary for this; and I honestly don't think such a thing even makes sense as a concept. Should we hunt down descendents of nazis and kill them for the crimes of their ancestors?
I'm not saying that I'd necessarily agree with the expulsion of all settlers, but I'm saying it's not my place to pass judgment and if they tell me to leave, it's definitely not my place to argue why I have a right to this stolen land.
The “righting” of historical wrongs is not necessary for this
Yes it is. Some things are unforgivable and must be made right in its entirety. The people who benefited from that wrong, myself included, have absolutely zero right to comment on what that should entail.
myself included, have absolutely zero right to comment on what that should entail
Can you please explain why you said this, then?
Motherfucker, landback means the LAND which is rightfully the Indigenous’ is taken BACK, and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.
and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.
This would mean that like 99.9% of Earth's population has to move somewhere. Almost all land was fought over endlessly and changed metaphorical hands multiple times over. What we call "indigenous people" in a territory is usually just whoever was winning those wars before written history began.
What "landback" actually means is recognizing the systemic racism that was and still is perpetuated against the indigenous people by means of taking away their ancestral lands, slaughtering and enslaving their ancestors, and destroying their way of life; and addressing that racism by giving jurisdiction and sovereignty over their lands back to them. It doesn't mean that everyone but the indigenous people have to move out; descendants of colonizers born there are technically natives of that land too. The difference is that they get systemic advantages from their ancestry whereas indigenous people get systemic discrimination. This is the thing that ought to be addressed. (well, the horrifying economic and governance system that the colonizers brought and festered must be addressed too, but all three are tightly coupled together)
In the case of Israel the difference is that a lot of colonizers are first gen, they are not natives, they do have somewhere to "go back to", and they are actively perpetuating colonization and genocide rather than simply getting an advantage from their ancestors doing so. In such cases it of course makes sense for the decolonization effort to focus on direct expulsion of invaders.
Very few countries currently are based on native eviction, where settlers have nearly replaced the indigenous peoples. The US, canada, australia, new zealand, israel are the main ones.
I think it's projecting western colonial guilt to claim that all countries are equally based on indigenous eviction. Even colonial projects like Spain's in South America did not do to their indigenous peoples what the british did to north america.
Colonialist Spain formally recognized in 1542 Indigenous peoples as "free vassals of the Crown" as Spaniards themselves, not slaves. Of course, as in The Mission movie portrayed, many colonialists violated the Crown's laws (Columbus himself was imprisoned for violating a Crown law from 1495 banning enslaving Taíno people). The Spanish crown wanted conversion + integration whereas British sought *erasure * of the Indigenous. But it was not just the Crown laws, individuals from Spain easily intermarried from early on, the English did not.
This distinction of the Spanish colonist vs all their norther neighbors that were far more repressive. I attribute this to the Spanish experience under Islamic rule for 8 centuries, where differences were highly tolerated and conversion was 'only' mandatory for those not considered as "peoples of the Book" mentioned on the Islamic scriptures.
To conclude, Spanish colonialism, from the Americas to the Philippines, was abusive, sometimes heavily, but the centuries later the 'civilized' British one was plainly genocidal from beginning to finish and the independent United States, continued with the legacy if not increasing it. In word of historian James Axtell: "The Spanish asked Native people to become something else [Christians]; the British demanded they vanish."
Very few countries currently are based on native eviction, where settlers have nearly replaced the indigenous peoples.
As a founding point? Yes, I agree. I also agree that colonization scale done by British was greater than anything ever done before.
However, that wasn't my point. My point was: almost everyone on Earth lives where they do because their ancestors killed or evicted the people that lived there previously. This is in particular is not unique to any western country. Hell, reading the history of Russia, my home country, makes it pretty clear that my own deep ancestry did plenty of killing and evicting too, mostly of themselves, to get to where they all ended up (not even talking about Siberia here). It wasn't at the founding point of Russia though, and none of the peoples who lost their wars are culturally alive anymore. Does it matter if all the conquest led to the foundation of a modern country, or just different tribal lands (or later city states)? I don't think it does.
I think what does matter is justice for those descendants of the colonized who are still alive, and if there's noone left, at least understanding and recognition of the horribleness that lead up to the point of your birth.
This is an extremely white washed version of land back. Pretty sure land back means full control over what happens on that land, including what kind of people can live on it, something that is currently controlled exclusively by the colonial government.
If they're feeling generous they might give you the option to stay on the condition that you assimilate into their culture.
You know, the thing Europeans forced Indigenous peoples to do. Not saying settlers should be forced through violence to do so, but I think it's more than fair that if you're going to stay, you have to assimilate.
But you're not entitled to even assimilation if they just don't want you here. And they have plenty of reason not to want you here.
I know that as a 1st gen Chinese immigrant to Canada (I came here as a kid so wasn't my choice), if all the Indigenous groups where I live unambiguously told me to GTFO. I would in good conscience have to do so and hope I can use my birth certificate to reclaim Chinese citizenship. I'm by every definition a settler so it's only fair. Whatever struggles I have in China (namely language barrier since I can barely read Chinese) I will have to deal with and it's not on the Indigenous people to let me stay just because I can't survive anywhere else.
Where you go back to and what happens to you isn't the problem of the people you colonized. And by transferring that problem on to them, you are in fact perpetuating colonialism.
I don't have another country waiting to accept me, and I don't particularly want to leave the only place I've ever lived, so if they want me gone, it is their problem. Are they tossing me in jail because I have the wrong ethnicity? Deporting me to a place I have no connection to?
I really didn't think I was being subtle here. I'm going to stop "just asking questions" and instead say that I'm surprised to see, in this of all threads, a sincere argument that there are some circumstances where it is okay for one ethnic group to systemically displace another, despite both groups only having that place to claim as a homeland.
despite both groups only having that place to claim as a homeland.
Your claim isn't even close to the magnitude of their claim. They've been here for over ten thousand years. They. Own. This. Continent. And. Always. Will.
And again, we displaced them. We are the colonizing class. I am calling for the reversing of what was done to them, which necessarily includes giving them back control over the land. I'm not saying they should displace anyone, but they alone have the choice.
Instead of complaining that indigenous people don't have the right to remove you, maybe you should focus on contributing to decolonization so they have a reason to let you stay.
where it is okay for one ethnic group to systemically displace another
Ah the old "reverse ethnic cleansing"... all you white supremacists are coming out to play.
The absolute gall of westerners whose ancestors literally did ethnic cleansing, to then yell that at their victims at the hint of returning stolen land back to indigenous sovereignty.
As if indigenous societies never fought wars and claimed land between eachother. Send all of humanity to Africa and let the squirrels and birds take back their land while we're at it.
As if indegenous societies never fought wars and claimed land between eachother.
Not at the scale colonialism has, no. Skirmishes and even conquest between individual tribes is fundamentally different from the systematic genocide of an entire continent's population.
At what scale does a genocide become bad enough to deport everyone? Without written history, it's hard to say exactly how pre-colonial conflics in North America played out, but I've found a few sources that suggest that inter-tribe warfare can be just as bloody as any other war (as far as the technology allowed, of course). "Skirmishes between tribes" is quite an understatement.
At what scale? I'd say it's definitely closer to colonialism than it is to Indigenous wars. No doubt some Indigenous groups were capable of immense cruelty to those around them, but a continent wide ethnic cleansing is something utterly incomprehensible to even the most expansionist Indigenous groups.
Colonialism developed logistics, beauracy, and governing bodies specifically for genocide, which happened over generations. The people in charge of perpetuating it didn't even know all the people they killed, the concept of those people alone were enough to condemn them. By contrast, even the largest scale Indigenous wars had the combatants reasonably familiar with those they were fighting.
I've found a case of recorded genocidal conflict ("with intent to exerminate opposing tribe"), but it was obviously postcolonial (because there are basically no records of precolonial history). I'll note that both sides were supplied by respective colonial powers, so it could very well be considered a proxy war; however the conflict was waged by the tribes themselves, at their own will. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver_W…
We can't forget that since the population density of America was much lower than in Europe, it's hard to compare conflicts apples-to-apples. Killing 10 individuals in a small tribe/village could exterminate nearly 10% their population; a number that would be considered devastating, quasi-genocidal if it happened between european powers.
As for your second point, it brings up a problem I have with your general argument. You argue that Indigenous conflics can be forgiven since the individuals had "no interest in waging a multi-generational genocide". I can confidently say that I, an North American with European decent, also have no interest in "waging a multi-generational genocide"; why must I be punished for it, then? Nobody gets to choose their ancestry.
(That being said, I acknowldege that systemic racism is still a very big problem today where I live, and I give my vote to whoever can reduce it the most)
I can confidently say that I, an North American with European decent, also have no interest in “waging a multi-generational genocide”; why must I be punished for it, then? Nobody gets to choose their ancestry.
The goal is not to punish anyone, nor is the goal to kick everyone out. The only goal of decolonization is to give back control of the land which was forcibly taken. Like Cowbee said, you give them the reigns, and then you let go. The logical extreme of this is that if they wanted everyone to leave, they could in theory, but that's only a logical extreme and it doesn't mean it will definitely happen. The majority of Indigenous groups make it pretty clear that's not what they want out of decolonization.
Indigenous peoples are not interested in punishing you. Most aren't even interested in having you go anywhere. They're reasonable people with empathy and compassion. The notion that you were born here not by choice is not lost on them.
I think this thread is focusing way too much on the notion that Indigenous people could force you out of their land and many people are under the assumption that they will definitely treat you worse than the current government treats you for not being Indigenous. But honestly, the way the current government treats even non-Indigenous people is absolute shit and getting worse by the day, so there's no reason not to think our lives would be better under Indigenous sovereignty.
I recommend the book The Red Deal: Indigenous Action to Save our Earth if you're interested in what decolonization looks like from the perspective of Indigenous people. They certainly don't solely think about benefiting themselves.
I have no right to say what they should do and neither do you.
Do you think all indigenous people can do whatever the fuck they want, as long as they are on their own land, and noone has any right to judge their actions?
1930s germans were indigenous people on their own land, after all.
I agree that cultural assimilation requirements and dealing harshly with white nationalists are ok; mass expulsion is not.
And I'm also pretty sure that most native Americans don't want mass expulsion, so this whole discussion is moot.
The aggressor, in the process of atoning for their atrocities, doesn't really have a right to say that the recourse proposed by the victim is unreasonable.
We are the colonial aggressors, Indigenous people are the colonized victims. I'm obviously not saying that eye for an eye doing the same to us as we did to Indigenous people is justified, but simply returning the land we stole is more than reasonable. And the logical extreme of returning stolen land is that if the rightful owners then wanted you to leave, you should.
Let's say a man and a woman live in the same house, and the man hits the woman. If the man is truly seeking to atone for his crime, and the woman tells him to move out because even seeing his face is traumatic for her, would it be reasonable for the man to complain that he has nowhere else to go? To ask the woman where she thinks he should go? To try and guilt the woman into letting him stay? If he does any of those, is he truly sorry for what he did?
You're right that most Indigenous people don't want mass expulsion. We should be incredibly grateful for that and it's a testament of their compassion and desire for equality among all people, even after all we did to them. What we shouldn't do is tell them that they can't tell us to leave or that we'd refuse to leave because we have a rightful claim to this land. Doing so is completely unproductive and will only serve to make us less deserving of staying.
First I'd like to say that I've never even been to north america, my skin colour is closer to "not ok" in the Family Guy card, and as such I'm more of a neutral observer than an active participant.
That said, the fault with your "man and woman" argument is assuming that all non-indigenous people are direct aggressors, or are directly culpable for heinous crimes against humanity.
A person cannot be culpable, and doesn't need to atone for, the crimes of their ancestors, people who share their race, or otherwise by unwillful association. The crime of most modern descendants of settlers is that of "illegal" (unjust?) immigration, no more and no less. And I don't believe it is even a crime, more of an infraction that can be rectified by learning the languages and traditions of the local population and becoming part of the community. There certainly are others who are still engaging in direct and active racism, colonization, even genocide. They deserve their own appropriate punishments, not due to their ancestry but due to their actions.
However, what descendants of colonizers definitely owe everyone else in the land is the generational, systemic wealth (land, money, property, social credit, etc) they accumulated because their ancestors robbed and pillaged it from everyone else. Giving it back doesn't necessarily mean moving out; it means giving back jurisdiction, sovereignty, and sharing the wealth in a just manner (this would probably require some form of socialism or communism).
What we shouldn’t do is tell them that they can’t tell us to leave or that we’d refuse to leave because we have a rightful claim to this land
I don't think it's about a "rightful claim" to the land. I agree that the descendants of settlers have an extremely weak claim to the land, if at all. Rather it is about basic humanity and decency. No person should be forced to move out of what they call home through no fault of their own. On the other hand any person living on someone else's land must learn the language and the culture. It is for the same reason I believe immigrants deserve help, accommodation, and local language courses rather than rejection.
Basically, read it as "you should kill yourself if you're not exactly where your ancestors lived 10000 years ago". That's what these people seem to think, they just don't want to say the quiet part out loud.
I live in a country where we have a very large amount of Russians, many of whom completely lack citizenship because they moved here during the soviet occupation so didn't get automatic Estonian citizenship after our independence, but also haven't gotten Estonian or Russian citizenship after the fact. This number has decreased over the years because most people have acquired some citizenship, but we still have tens of thousands with no state at all. I can't imagine simply deporting all of those people. In fact, we're now giving out citizenship to children of non-citizen parents who have lived in the country for at least 5 years, to avoid creating more stateless people. This is despite the fact that a lot of those people getting citizenship are also the descendants of settlers, with roots in a country hostile to our own. Those people's entire lives are here, who are we to uproot them just because we were here first? It's too late now.
As far as I know, my ancestors didn't steal anything. It's possible they did, and I'm sure they unfairly benefitted from systemic injustice and oppression of others, and I'm happy to help address that at the expense of my own privilege, but I don't see how that makes it okay to literally deport me to some strange country for their hypothetical crimes.
Makes it a bit difficult when the kid whining is actually a 40 year old man living in a house that his family has lived in for generations. Good luck making the appeal to them.
As far as I can tell, I'm being told that in this hypothetical scenario, it's okay for me to be jailed or removed from my home because I'm not indigenous. Am I misreading it?
If you're so concerned about it, maybe go talk to some of the Indigenous people in your area and work with them then. Give them a reason to let you stay. You complaining to two other settlers on Lemmy certainly won't help your case.
Thanks for your concern, I'll make sure to double check my standing with them but I think I'll be alright. Maybe if I'm lucky, I can do a DNA test and find some indigenous ancestry that I didn't know about, the thresholds would probably have to be pretty low but it's possible I could squeak in there and get to be on the ruling side instead.
Tbh if you're ever told to leave, this kind of mentality will probably be why.
Every Indigenous person I've ever met has been super nice and welcoming. They're not out for revenge like you seem to think they are. I obviously can't and shouldn't speak on their behalf, but just from my limited experience talking to Indigenous people where I live, they're perfectly willing to work with the people living here, Indigenous or not. Indigenous peoples have also been some of the first groups to advocate for the government to accept refugees, using the fact that it's their land as an argument for people from elsewhere to live here. Your strawman notion of the racist, exclusionary Indigenous person who seeks to do to white people what they did to them is just that, a strawman.
You're also working under the assumption that they will treat you worse than the current government treats you. News flash, even with white privilege, you're currently being treated like you don't have a right to the land. How much is your landlord charging you to live here? Do you have a right to a home under the current laws? No you don't. If you lose all your money, you will become homeless, and plenty of jurisdictions outright criminalize homelessness and will throw you in jail because of it.
I never said I thought they'd treat me like this. In fact, I don't, for exactly the reasons you're listing. You are the one saying that it would be okay to treat me like this, which is why I've been talking to you about your statements, not them.
I'm not saying it's okay or not okay to treat you like anything. I certainly don't want you to be treated badly. I'm saying it's not my place to say what Indigenous people want out of decolonization.
I admit I was being snarky in a lot of my replies because I was ticked off by your comments. You mentioned deportation and jail and I just said "yeah those are possibilities." Reading it back I can see how I should have put more nuance into this.
I should definitely have stressed this in my previous responses, but Indigenous people are naturally extremely diverse and there is no single agreed upon narrative of what decolonization will entail. There will be some Indigenous groups that only want to be left alone on their land, but there will be others that don't have a problem with anyone living on their land. You can see some of this diversity in the different Indigenous groups' views on immigration, but those views are likely different from the views they will adopt after decolonization. The notion that all the Indigenous groups will either unanimously let you stay or tell you to leave is not the correct way to think about it.
Also, Indigenous territories overlap and Indigenous people generally have more nuanced ideas of "territory" and "ownership" compared to European cultures and their strict borders for property and sovereignty. Go to native-land.ca and see for yourself. Indigenous peoples tend to focus more on mutual agreements and understanding between neighbors as to who uses what resources, agreements which are fluid and based on the needs of the people living there, as opposed to drawing lines on a map. Concepts like citizenship and deportation are based on the European framework of sovereignty, not Indigenous ones.
As to what all this entails for the settlers living here? I can't say. Everything in North America is built around colonialism and we settlers can't really imagine what it will be like for all of that to be removed with any degree of accuracy. But I highly doubt there will be large scale forced expulsions. I'd say it's more likely that the notions of property and land titles dissolve in favour of a more nuanced and community oriented approach to where people live. We will have to adopt this paradigm if we want to continue living here.
Hey, now we're finding common ground! Sincerely, I agree with basically all of this, and the other stuff about the current capitalist regime not really respecting the rights of people any better than the hypothetical indigenous totalitarian government that wants to kick out all the white people. The only thing I really wanted to push back on was the idea that it'd be totally okay for mass deportations or imprisonments to happen as long as it was indigenous people doing it. Even keeping in mind that I've got a lot of white privilege and that I can never know what it's like to be in those shoes, I feel like it's still legitimate to say that there is a point where it would cross over into """reverse oppression""" or whatever; of course that point is essentially impossible to actually reach in practice so it's not worth worrying about other than bickering on a forum. We should be so lucky to be worrying about "geez, are indigenous groups gaining so much power that they might actually be a threat to the American government???"
This hits the nail on the head. Settlers fear, above all, being treated anywhere near as badly as we've treated indigenous peoples, when they have been infinitely kinder. The last shall be first, that doesn't mean they will kill of us or deport all of us, but it means the decisions will be driven by indigenous people first and foremost.
It's telling of the settler mindset that they immediately assume decolonization entails being treated almost as horribly as settlers have treated indigenous peoples.
The last will be first. Landback and decolonization means putting the reigns into the hands of the indigenous people's hands, and letting go of the reigns, not just holding onto the reigns but giving the colonized people some of the reigns. The best settlers can hope for is to be treated kinder than they have treated the people whose land they stole. I myself was born in the US, and am still a settler here, just because I was born here does not absolve my role. It means I have a historic duty to help carry out decolonization and land back, from the back, not as a leading role.
While I agree in general, there's also nuance to be had IMHO.
For example: Russian Empire colonizing Siberia was a bloody affair. Of course it was not anywhere near the atrocities committed in the new world, but still a lot of natives died due to localized warfare and disease. Do you think that when USSR formed, the Siberian peoples should have been given full sovereignty, as separate countries (not even part of USSR), and rule over themselves and the descendants of russian settlers that were left there; or was the actual solution of giving them autonomous republics within the RSFSR the better one? I lean on the latter. I think if a socialist revolution ever happens in the US, this is the way it would happen. Full jurisdiction and sovereignty for indigenous people in certain areas (they need to be much larger than current reservations, though), shared jurisdiction and sovereignty in other limited areas where descendants of settlers live. And, of course, land to the peasants, factories to the workers - I strongly suspect both casual and systemic racism will be much less of an issue once capitalism no longer burdens the working class.
In the extremely unlikely event that indigenous people got direct executive control over what happens in the continental united states, I don't think they'd even want the mass exodus of all white people. Nor do I think they'd want full cultural assimilation. My entire life, the prevailing narrative has always just been the end of systemic oppression. Very frequently I've heard indigenous rights activists demand the free use of/free travel across land for things like hunting, which is a pretty small ask. Just because this or that action would be justified, doesn't mean it's the action people want. IMO the second minority ethnic groups feel safe and represented these kinds of mass exodus narratives will fade away. Doubly so if there was a transition to socialism that went with it, and some thought went into identifying the different national identities (so something akin to a soviet of nationalities could be formed).
are actively perpetuating colonization and genocide rather than simply getting an advantage from their ancestors
USAmericans are also doing this too. The overconsumption done by yankees would require multiple planet earths if everyone were allowed to consume as much as they do and the US government is guilty of exporting a capitalist system that causes climate change, not to mention the imperialism abroad. There is no functional difference between the US and Israel, just "Big Satan" vs. "Little Satan."
USAmericans are also doing this too. The overconsumption done by yankees would require multiple planet earths if everyone were allowed to consume as much as they do and the US government is guilty of exporting a capitalist system that causes climate change, not to mention the imperialism abroad.
I mentioned this as another thing that needs addressing in a timely manner.
I agree with your points entirely, it's just amusing to see the people who do disagree experience a tiny iota of the fear and despair that the indigenous peoples of America and beyond had to feel when their world was destroyed and stolen.
It is really telling that suddenly they fear for their lives once they think they will be victims of the same colonization that gave them privilege. They've internalized that this process only functions through mass slaughter and terror and start waxing poetic about "human nature"
Realistically and logistically speaking, if they were ever to retrieve their land back, the Native Americans would probably be MORE accepting of the idea to live amongst the working class that don't originate from their land rather than "evicting" the population, basic infrastructure (that's already replaced native tribes' land) would need maintenance, first of all.
The fact that it scares them that this highly unlikely scenario of reclaiming land then the Indigenous do whatever they want with it is very poetic. The fact that they've probably also imagined dramatically violent scenarios of this is also funny, funny strange.
Motherfucker, landback means the LAND which is rightfully the Indigenous' is taken BACK, and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you're currently a part of.
Go back to where? I've never lived anywhere else. Land back does not imply ethnic cleansing, and when you say shit like this, you marry the concepts, doing massive damage to the movement.
While OP show north america in the 1800s they failed to supply the original British mandate area from the 1920s which gives a bit perspective to the next images. Also note that while the Jewish leadership accepted the UN partition plan it was rejected by the Arab/Palestinian over and over.
1) How does it provide any further perspective? "They actually don't deserve their land because they were colonized by the British"?
2) Why would you expect the Palestinians to accept a plan to give half of their land away to a violent colonial expansionist ideology. Should Poland have peacefully given half their land to Germany to avoid the invasion? Do you really think that would work anyway, or is it just an excuse to blame the victims for their own genocide?
Edit: Also, since then Palestine has called for the partition borders to be enforced, and Israel/their allies were the ones to deny it. Israel only ever supported the plan as a means to an end, further colonial expansion.
Over the years borders are dynamic. Most of the time they are changed via wars, violent conflicts and later treaties, some more stable than others. It happen all over the world throughout history. Unless there is a large physical border, you can look at almost any part of the world and see the huge amount of border changes over the years. Focusing on just two places like the above "meme" is hypocrisy.
Also note that right before that Israeli leaders literally killed the UN mefiator Folke Bernadotte because they didn't like how his partition plan and then replaced him with a Zionist who gave all most if Palestine to Jews.
I get the point but these are two very different circumstances. Israelites and Palestinians are both native to the area. Their ancestors were Canaans and Philistines. The ownership of land is the result of western powers deciding how best to divide and conquer.
Native Americans are native to the area and Europeans/Americans were not.
"no one in my family tree has any memory of the place but we have a book that says we lived there thousands of years ago" is not what most people mean when they say "native"
I get the sentiment, and by no means are the reservations good or something that should've been how it played out, but I do feel like putting them on the same level as ICE centers and concentration camps downplays just how bad those latter two really are/were.
I get the feeling you've not been told about all the death and disease Native Americans experienced in reservations, especially at the beginning. The only real difference is reservations did not have buildings...they were just wastelands.
putting them on the same level as ICE centers and concentration camps
You're right they were way fucking worse than that.
Have you actually been to a reservation? And not one of the "good ones" (disgusts me to even split hairs like this) but I mean like Pine Ridge. They are literally death camps in all but name.
A couple years ago one elder was burning his own clothes to keep warm and not freeze to death, another elder died in his home because his fireplace went out while he was sleeping. Drug abuse is rampant kids are killing each other over scraps, there was a shooting at a powwow last year in the middle of sun dance. There is almost no drinking water that isn't contaminated by the nearby bombing range and uranium mines.
The average life expectancy on Pine Ridge reservation TODAY is lower than it was in Gaza before the recent bombings started.
Oh and just to get there, the tribes around the black hills were sent on a forced death march through the badlands to settle in the least desirable land in the region.
There were also white towns that made money selling alcoholic beverages and drugs to native reservations. Usually long periods of starvation cause high rates of diabetes (amongst other symptoms) in a populace - today the lakota people have one of the highest percentage of diabetes per capita in the world.
To see diagram progressions like this is really sad. like a beautiful rainforest gradually being chipped away into nothing. same perps too considering the vast majority of Israelis are European
Look up DNA testing in Israel, their govt doesn't want people testing and finding out their genetic history seems to include an awful lot of eastern Europe and not anything from the Middle East.
Even Ashkenazi Jews are from Turkey, not historic Palestine.
Purdy much, most Palestinians are actually the native Jewish population who converted to Christianity and then Islam. That's why the Israeli government doesn't want DNA testing.
The official Israeli CBS cites 50% of Israeli Jews having their ancestry in Europe, primarily Ashkenazi and post-Soviet groups.... but of course, with DNA test ban in Israel is hard to know for sure... Being 75% of the Israeli population Jewish, that places it as 2/3 of Jews in Israel are from European origin... and that is their own stats. I would even say more are.
Wait a sec, wasn't the majority of that land in the western states claimed by New Spain and then Mexico? How is the maker of this map qualifying "land of native nations"?
Then it's fine to fasten a noose around the natives' neck and very gradually tighten it?
What else could you be indicating by posting about this in this context? It's true that natives were nomadic people moving through the land, but how does that make it right for europeans to come in and claim land in a permanent fashion from across the globe?
The lands you are probably referring was the Mexican Cession (most of the US western lands now). That cession happened after the Mexican war that ended in the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo signed in 1848. So the map mostly accurately reflects that as US territory in 1850.
Back then the ideological split inside american settlers was between actively killing all natives or putting them into reservations to left them naturally die off over time - as they were "evolutionary obsolete". In fact the bourgeois revolution of the american landlords was started because the British tried to limit american settler expansion and the expansion of slavery into Creek and Chickasaw lands.
The idea of not killing off natives was never present in any large capacity in the early united states.
Isn't it fair to say that Native Americans didn't consider land to be "owned" by anyone? What colonialism (and agriculture) did was assert control over land that was previously thought to be communal.
The tragedy of the commons is a capitalist invention. Shared resources have all been managed effectively until the point where they become considered private resources.
I would say that you are mis/uninformed about the history of healthcare, student loans, and financial securities in the US, and the role the US government played in screwing up each of those industries. But, I see that I'm on an ml community somehow, so I know that would fall on deaf ears, because government is part of capital or whatever. So instead I'll just say we probably don't share any points of commonality in our world view, take my slew of downvotes, and bid you good day.
The government doesn't just exist in a vacuum as you seem to think. It represents the interests of those who hold power in a particular society. In the US, it is the capital owning class, and these are the people who decide to cut your healthcare, to gouge you for education, and so on. The government simply exercises their will. Entire books have been written on the subject, yet here you are confidently attempting to debate a topic you clearly haven't spent even a few minutes thinking about.
Also, if a large central government was the problem, then we'd see the same kind of shit happening in China that's happening under capitalist regimes.
Comcast, US internet giant and service provider rolled out a “WiFi motion” feature to millions of customer routers. Once customers enable it, they’ll be able to detect motion in their homes and get notifications.
And yes, reading through Xfinity’s privacy policy indicates they do monitor the WiFi motion data, and will share it with law enforcement or other third parties without notifying you. 🙁
Not only is this a threat to your privacy but can impact your helath, as over-exposure to EMF has been linked to anxiety, fatigue, cancer, and many other bio-markers of poor health.
Oh brother this guy stinks!
The tech itself is interesting though. Triangulation of users indoors and outdoors is already possible
Times Square even uses it by offering free Wi-Fi. If a bunch of 50 year old white men connect to the wifi and are in the same spot, they'll put up a fishing ad or some other shi.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
I feel like there's probably a way I could do the same thing without Comcrap as a middleman. Anyone written libraries for doing this kind of thing with an openwrt box and a bunch of Linux machines?
Fungal infections are getting harder to treat as they grow more resistant to available drugs, according to research published Wednesday in The Lancet Microbe
Fungal infections are harder to treat because the US doctors did nothing but hand out antibiotics like they are candy, because it was an easy (no thinking involved) treatment that allowed them to spend 15 minutes or less with patience (cattle.)
However, antibiotics destroy good bacteria along with the bad, causing lots of skin conditions, fungal diseases, also immunity comes into play. Welcome to western medicine, they caused this issue.
Once upon a time, "Never again" was uttered with trembling sincerity. It was the mantra forged in the ashes of Auschwitz, a promise to generations unborn that the horrors of genocide would never be repeated. But today, in an age of digital spectacle and political impunity, "Never again" has become "Ever again". And we are witnessing a grotesque inversion of memory.
From the Warsaw Ghetto to Srebrenica to Gaza, the imagery of genocide - especially the suffering of children - has not only lost its sacredness, it has become fodder for mockery, comedy and the most cynical forms of entertainment. In a shocking display of insensitivity, the Dutch Netflix comedy Football Parents features a scene that compares the victims of the Srebrenica genocide to clumsy child football players, turning the Bosnian genocide into a punchline.
The Dutch state is currently being sued for failing to prevent genocide in Gaza. Meanwhile, a recent study revealed that nearly half a million Dutch citizens took part in the Holocaust. Rather than confront its violent past, Dutch media recycles it as "dark humour".
Incredibly, Football Parents mocked children's football skills by comparing them to genocide victims - a grotesque parallel to 12 April 1993, when 74 Bosnian children were killed by Serb shells while playing football on a school field in Srebrenica.
Three decades on, western states and media have turned 'Never again' into a punchline, mocking Bosnian genocide victims while enabling new atrocities against Palestinians
Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank have beaten to death a United States citizen in his early 20s, the victim’s family members and rights groups have said.
“We are aware of reports of the death of a US citizen in the West Bank,” Reuters reported a State Department spokesperson as saying. The official declined to comment further “out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones” of the reported victim.
Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank have beaten to death a United States citizen in his early 20s, the victim’s family members and rights groups have said.
“We are aware of reports of the death of a US citizen in the West Bank,” Reuters reported a State Department spokesperson as saying. The official declined to comment further “out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones” of the reported victim.
Don't worry. Rachel Corrie was white and they killed her with the US' knowledge too. US conservatives don't even know she existed, liberals barely either.
Don't be deliberately disingenuous. And if you're insist on it, then I'll match you: point to where I said you used the word 'only' in your comment, in my comment.
I am begging reddit debate lords to actually learn what 'strawman' means, rather than treating the wikipedia page on logical fallacies like a list of magic incantations.
I am also begging them to just talk plainly: "You strawmanned me", rather than this insufferable nerd sarcasm bullshit of "sorry you strawman didn't work."
Having your bullshit called out clearly triggers you. Have you considered making informed, good faith arguments instead of trying to devalue the labels legitimately applied to your weak devices? Don't want your strawman called out? Don't use strawman arguments. Don't want your whataboutism called out? Don't use whataboutism. Don't like that I called out all your normal devices? Don't use them.
If you stop using those weak devices and actually engage in a good faith discussion I'm here. Keep using those weak devices and I will keep calling them out.
You need to understand that these just aren't the devastating insults that you think they are outside of the tankie triad.
My original point was that the MAGAzis don't give a shit about a Palestinian American being killed because he isn't a real American (white Christian fascist bootlicker.)
The MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't give a shit that a Palestinian American was killed because they don't believe that he was a "real" American because he wasn't white, he wasn't a Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
If you want to have a conversation I'm here but you haven't made any good faith effort to contribute to the conversation for several comments.
I’m here but you haven’t made any good faith effort to contribute to the conversation for several comments.
Why would I try to converse in good faith with someone who responds by randomly copy pasting Latin from Wikipedia because reddit taught them that's what debate is, while consistently talking in the most smug, condescending and disingenuous tone imaginable?
You would participate in a good faith conversation because you have intelligent opinions on the topic of the conversion which is the fact that the MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that a Palestinian American was killed because they don't believe that he is a "real" American because he isn't white, he isn't Christian, and he isn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
You instead used weak devices as a bad faith effort to distract from the subject of the conversation and thus to derail the it. My calling out those weak devices has rendered you completely ineffective. All you've done is whinge about my calling you out and called me names and hurled insults.
It didn't work. It isn't going to work. I'm still here and I'm still willing to talk about the fact that the MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that an American Palestinian was killed because they don't think that he's a "real" American because he wasn't white, he wasn't Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
If you want to have an intelligent conversation I remain willing, or just keep hissing and spitting, whatever.
You would participate in a good faith conversation because you have intelligent opinions
Why? When you're just going to respond with copy pasting reddit debate incantations, lying, and talking like an anime villain. Which is exactly what you continue to do.
You just can't help yourself can you? One tired cliché after another.
The MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that an American Palestinian was killed because they don't believe that he was a "real" American because he wasn't white, he wasn't Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
A conversing isn't a debate. It's an exchange of ideas with the goal of expanding understanding of each other's opinions.
Do you want to have a conversion or do you want to continue to use one tired cliché device after another and have me point them out? The problem isn't that I'm calling them out. The problem is that you're using them in the first place. Stop being so weak and ineffectual and actually have a conversation.
The MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that an American Palestinian was killed because they don't believe that he was a "real" American because he wasn't white, he wasn't Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
Still here when you have something intelligent to say.
Are you actually willing to talk without resorting to insults, misapplying formal debate jargon you don't understand, or misrepresenting what was previously said?
I pointed out that you were using logical fallacies to attempt to derail the conversation. If you don't use logical fallacies I will not point out that you are using logical fallacies.
I've pointed out that you have used strawman arguments more than once because you've used strawman arguments more than once. If you stop using logical fallacies I'll stop pointing out that you're using logical fallacies. I'm not going to stop pointing out the fact that you're using logical fallacies because you don't lie the fact that I'm pointing out that you're using logical fallacies or because you keep whinging about it.
The MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that a Palestinian American was killed because they don't think he was a real American because he wasn't white, he wasn't Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker.
Some Reddit refugee is downvote every one of my comments. How fucking pathetic.
If you want to have a conversation about the fact that the MAGAzis and MAGAzi bootlickers don't care that a Palestinian American was killed because they don't think he was a "real" American because he wasn't white, he wasn't Christian, and he wasn't a MAGAzi bootlicker without using logical fallacies I'm happy to do it. If you continue to use logical fallacies I will continue to point out that you are. It's really easy. If you want to have a good faith conversation I'm happy to do that and I will continue to ignore your insults and name calling. Up to you.
Since the beginning of what’s generally called ‘RussiaGate’ three years ago, pundits, media outlets, even comedians have all become insta-experts on supposed Russian propaganda techniques. The most cunning of these tricks, we are told, is that of “whataboutism” – a devious Soviet tactic of deflecting criticism by pointing out the accusers’ hypocrisy and inconsistencies. The tu quoque - or, “you, also” - fallacy, but with a unique Slavic flavor of nihilism, used by Trump and leftists alike in an effort to change the subject and focus on the faults of the United States rather than the crimes of Official State Enemies.
But what if "whataboutism" isn’t describing a propaganda technique, but in fact is one itself: a zombie phrase that’s seeped into everyday liberal discourse that – while perhaps useful in the abstract - has manifestly turned any appeal to moral consistency into a cunning Russian psyop. From its origins in the Cold War as a means of deflecting and apologizing for Jim Crow to its braindead contemporary usage as a way of not engaging any criticism of the United States as the supposed arbiter of human rights, the term "whataboutism" has become a term that - 100 percent of the time - is simply used to defend and legitimizing American empire’s moral narratives.
That's an interesting excerpt. I always thought the proper response to an identified whatabout is to simply say "I asked you first." -That's assuming the opposite party refused to respond to the initial premise, argument, or question. I imagine if they did respond to the initial premise, argument, or question then asking whatabout... is just a standard form of discussion and debate, or so I'd think.
Basically a straight up admition that they’re both meaningless though terminating cliches
Another straw man. You guys are on a roll.
What is cliché is resorting to strawman arguments and whataboutism/bothsidesism when your dogmatic incantations don't win the day. They are the refuge of the weak. Attempting to devalue the ideas is a transparent effort to reduce the impact of your weakness being labelled, It's the same as white supremacists loudly calling out Godwin's Law when they are rightly labelled as Nazis or Zionists labelling legitimate criticism of the actions of the state of Israel antisematism. Mike Godwin himself said, "By all means, compare these assholes to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you."
Have a good faith conversation. As long as you use these super weak devices I'm going to call them out. I don't care what names you call me or what insults you hurl.
You comment strongly implied that you thought Maple Engineer thought this was a MAGA-specific phenomenon. There isn't the same strong implication in Maple Engineer's comment.
Can I point to where I said you said that explicitly? I can point to where I said you said it implicitly though. (emphasis mine)
You comment strongly implied that you thought Maple Engineer thought this was a MAGA-specific phenomenon.
You also more or less said it explicitly though, if you want to go down that route. I can't quote a specific part of your comment because your entire comment is based on this suggestion. (emphasis mine again)
You say that like MAGA are the only ones that don’t care about Israel killing Americans. Were you even aware that it happened under Biden?
Where did they say they only thought it was the "Magazis" who don't give a shit? You're like those amerikan liberals who think that criticising genocide joe meant you thought trump was better. You can make a negative comment about one amerikan politician without it being a positive about another. They're practically the same anyway.
I never said that I wasn't "willing to accept implied statements"? Their original comment absolutely did not imply they thought that it was only MAGAheads who were ok with Israel killing USAmericans, on the same level that you implied they thought that. You're like that tweet about "I like waffles" "So you hate pancakes?". They didn't say anything about Biden either way...
Their original comment absolutely did not imply they thought that it was only MAGAheads who were ok with Israel killing USAmericans, on the same level that you implied they thought that.
Whether or not there was an implication at all is subjective. I don't think that criticism of one party should be understood to be at the exclusion of another party, but whether or not that implication is there at all is up to you. I think making those sorts of inferences makes it very difficult to have any discussion about politics when criticising some group is meant as condoning another group; in that case any political statement would have to be very long to list all the groups it applies to.
But I didn't say that it wasn't implied at all; I said it wasn't implied at the same level. Your reply to the original comment would make no sense if you didn't believe that they only thought MAGA supporters were ok with Israel killing USAmericans. There's far more ambiguity in the original comment, and I don't believe it automatically lends itself to your interpretation (which was proven wrong by that commenter saying they don't believe such a thing), but in any case it is absolutely not the same level of implication as your comment.
It is a trend started that started a decade ago (ironically with Obama!) but the transition is now complete; Americans with a skin color, let alone if naturalized, are not considered "actual American" therefore no longer news worthy. At least, they still give a conditional pass to those darker skins conforming with the ideology of the presidency that happens to be ruling at the time.
For once I believe on that “out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones”, because the BS the State Department spokesperson would have said instead would have been extremely infuriating for the mourning family.
That's a good question, it makes me similarly think 'What happens to the social contract when a nation & government no longer provide security to it's own citizens?'
That's what happened in Russia, the Tsar responded to the old and well established act of a priest delivering a letter to the Tsar to ask for aid during hardships by ordering his Calvary soldiers to open fire on the priest and crowd. It was literally an act of submission to the Tsar. At that point, people stopped seeing the whole divine right of kings concept as holding water.
Out running errands and see a cluster of weirdos kitted out for war, milling about like they’re stuck in a Call of Duty matchmaking lobby? Grab some pics and vids to raise the alarm. Keep in mind that specificity is paramount when logging these sightings, both to increase efficacy and avoid panic. Fortunately, one of master’s own tools has proven itself an invaluable counterintelligence asset. Plucked straight from U.S. military field books, the acronym S.A.L.U.T.E. can help you gather the most pertinent details. It’s also the practice almost universally recommended by the groups I spoke to.
Size: How many people and/or vehicles do you see?
Activity: What, specifically, are they doing that’s suspicious?
Location: What address, cross streets, or landmark are they at (the more specific the better)?
Uniform: What are they wearing, whether it’s fatigues, nondescript civilian clothes, or something else entirely?
Time: What date and time did you observe them?
Equipment: What guns, weapons, or devices do they appear to be carrying?
**Thanks for taking such comprehensive notes. Now where do you send them? **
There’s no evidence the feds are conducting “how do you do, fellow antifa” honeypot busts. But anyone attempting to post alerts about the activities of federal agents would be wise to operate as if they were. The groups I spoke to remain concerned about infiltrators stymying their efforts. Even at the press conference, activists clocked and called out a suspected undercover among the crowd.
Unfortunately, there’s no one-size-fits-all approach for this element of activism. To safely discover and interact with the patchwork of anti-ICE activities around LA, I relied on trusted individuals from my personal network of journalists and activists, as well as community groups and organizers leading local efforts. But if you’re just getting started, the accounts mentioned in this article, any of the more than 65 groups that have joined LA’s Community Self Defense Coalition, or the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights are solid sources of information. And if you’re ever unsure about an entity’s bona fides, sites like mutualaidhub.org can help determine if an outfit is legit or carpetbagging.
My previous setup was with Authelia and lldap, and VoidAuth is heavily inspired by a combination of both. I think the advantages VoidAuth has are simple user management, supporting user registration/invitation, more branding customization, and a better end-user UI (imo).
There are other great selfhosted auth solutions such as Authelia and lldap, and also Authentik, Keycloak, pocket-id, and Rauthy. I would encourage anyone looking for a selfhosted auth solution to shop around!
I have never used nforwardauth, but it looks like it offers a subset of the functionality of VoidAuth. Both support proxy-auth, but VoidAuth has user management features and also supports OIDC, passkeys, etc. I think nforwardauth looks like a great project, you can always setup VoidAuth alongside and try it out!
I also I'm a fairly recent convert to these kinds of headphones. I also can't wear regular headphones or earplugs without discomfort after awhile. But these I can wear for a lot longer. And also since it doesn't cover your ear you can still hear conversations and stuff around you. .. that last part may be a plus or minus.
My old Xperia Z5 Compact was the only phone I've ever owned that had decent speakers. You could actually listen music with them without getting pissed off. It was small and had amazing audio capabilities and great camera, easily the best phone I've ever owned.
But listening music / watching videos in public with your phone speakers on is an abomination. It should be made illegal everywhere.
On a side note, if anyone here has heard some of the latest gen iPhones, they honestly sound dramatically better than the vast majority of Bluetooth speakers, especially when held sideways for stereo. At medium volume with my eyes closed, it sounds comparable to my MacBook speakers. I’m seriously shocked at whatever magic Apple is pulling off there.
Obviously neither compare to an audiophile setup, but they’re far above listenable.
I’ve not yet heard an Android compare personally, but I’d love to be proven wrong.
In my experience, this is often people who might not have access to a way to access headphones. Yeh its annoying, it doesnt ruin my day tho. Just go with it
last time I saw this, it was some older guy blasting alice in chains, which is what i was listening to anyway
Hi, as many others I am looking to switch to linux before microsoft kills win 10. I read a lot of advice online for distros, but my main needs are not really discussed. I need a distro that runs well for game dev specifically unreal engine 5.4-6.
I am currently aiming to try mint, as it has been recommended to be stable and i already dabbled a little bit with Ubuntu on my laptop.
I am not afraid of some tech journey, but even though arch seems the coolest, with Wayland, kde, hyperland customization, i am not confident enough to use it for work. I heard it can completely crash your system if your a noob.
So in essence i need something stable that is relatively easy to use and has great ue5 and gaming perf. Thanks in advance for all the help.
Mint is a great choice, it is very stable, and it really holds your hand via the Software Center.
However, stable also means old: it does not support the latest hardware.
If you have hardware that released after (rough estimate) April 2024, consider something based on Fedora, such as Bazzite, instead. It comes with modern drivers and should support modern hardware much better.
Bazzite was heavenly promoted for gaming, but there was no mention on using it for work. Does it work well for regular productivity, code, graphic design, 3d?
You can do that on Bazzite. The only thing I would say is that Bazzite is an atomic fedora distro meaning that the core OS is immutable and everything lives on a layer above the base OS. This helps stability for the OS and make rolling back and repairs much easier. But sometimes installing apps, especially apps that interact with the base OS can be a bit of a pain. On top of that, atomic distros are less common, which means that if you are looking for help, it will be a little harder to find stuff online.
Overall, I like fedora. I have used basically all of the DEs, but tend to hover between KDE and Gnome. Fedora is a little more recent than Debian, but it isn’t a rolling release like Arch or OpenSUSE. This means you get some of the newer kernel features, but the updates are still staggered and released at intervals and tested. I find it to be very stable.
They're actually working on making a version specifically for game developers, but it isn't released yet. There is also a more generic version for developers. dev.bazzite.gg
Of course you can, why wouldn't you? It's Fedora Kinoite with added stuff for gaming. There is a special edition for devs in the making, in case you're interested in keeping an eye on that: universal-blue.discourse.group…
I'm not sure about unreal, but installing godot was pretty easy. That said if you end up needing to install any languages, tools, etc OSTree makes it a PITA
I heard it can completely crash your system if your a noob.
You can crash anything if you try. Been there, done that. Just go ahead and start using it. Just keep backups which you always do, regardless the O/S and situation. (pro tip: TEST RESTORING THE BACKUPS)
Maybe make an extra backup before you try something and you'll live. You could also use a separate partition to store your files so you can re-install without touching your data. Make that partition size 'recognizable' (t.ex. the biggest by far and label it) so you won't mess up the partition selection when you re-install. And NO don't ask me how I know!
Yes Mint is a good choice for your migration. It has been put together in a way that makes it intuitive for a windows refugee. The menu layout has the "start" (mint) button bottom left with your apps in there.
The system apps are named obvious things like "software manager" and it has default apps installed to get you going.
Being derived from Ubuntu it is the best supported platform for commercial apps/games but with Ubuntu's weird choices (snap etc) tidied up.
It's the most recommended linux distro for beginners for a reason. It's a solid reliable well thought out platform
In my experience Fedora with GNOME is really use friendly and intuitive to use, and I've never borked it when not using the terminal. It also has a lot of extensions you can install to customise the experience, and almost everything can be done via a GUI.
I've had smooth sailing both with Fedora GNOME and Fedora KDE. And it's another "common choice" with good enterprise support thanks to Red Hat, just like Ubuntu and all their baby distros.
I'm not sure about unreal engine compatibility, but I've been using Fedora Silverblue and it works good enough. Sometimes I've seen graphical bugs, but they are fixed quick enough for me to not care too much. Since I use the computer for work (and I don't have much time to fiddle with my system) I have found that an atomic distro is the one that requires less maintenance, so it allows me to just do my work without having to troubleshoot things breaking. I have switched a lot of linux distros because I was never satisfied with how things looked or worked (and because of bugs with nvidia and other things, I am a long time linux user and things have never worked as smooth as today, now that we have wayland and proton and a lot of nice things). At the end of the day, I believe that the best thing to do is tho choose one of the most popular distros (Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, Arch) and make adjustments to fit your needs. Distro hopping is fun, but not so much when you're short on time and you have stuff to do. Hope this helps.
I doubt that would help, sadly. There is SO MUCH advice out there already, but people always think they are special and have a very rare and complicated use case.
Right, and I'd add a default option, e.g. "Unsure what to try first?" -> Yes ( Not -> rest of chart) -> "Try Debian Stable" -> "Do you like it?" (rest of chat)
I wouldn't debian stable is no better than any other mainstream distro. Worst in some regards as it tends to have really old versions of things. If that sounds nice to you then go for it. But it is not the default choice or recommendation for most people.
I won't enter the arguments about Debian itself (did that often enough, feel free to check my history or ignore entirely) rather my point is to have a default suggestion rather than "pick any" for newcomers which precisely are scared by the plethora of choices, as this very post suggests.
I think Fedora using either Gnome or KDE would be a great place for you to start. Ubuntu or Mint aren’t terrible choices either.
On the topic of Arch, there’s a Distro I use called EndeavourOS. It’s billed as an Arch based distro that’s geared towards the terminal, but unlike Arch it comes all of the basic software you might need right out of the box, and offers a long list of desktop environments (KDE, Gnome, and XFCE being the best choices on the list)
I use Hyprland on it, but Hyprland isnt advisable until you have some solid experience with a different desktop. Because it is geared towards the terminal, it expects you to install and update your software from the terminal. Not a difficult task, but it might not be ideal when you’re just getting started.
I’ve been running it for a long time without issue. But how “stable” it is depends on how much you read the documentation and developer announcements, and how much you fiddle with things you don’t understand. That can be true in mint or Ubuntu as well, none of them prevent you from breaking things.
Recently endeavour changed the way they deal with some firmware related packages, this would cause an error when updating, causing a handful of packages to not be upgraded. A quick DuckDuckGo search of the error message took me straight to a forum post by the devs explaining that you have to uninstall one of the related packages, and run the update again. If you didn’t think to look you’d probably panic and think your system was broken. Just an example of how the operating system itself doesn’t hold your hand. It’s up to you whether that’s acceptable or not.
On the topic of stability, save your important files on a separate drive. It’s been said elsewhere in the thread but bears repeating. As long as your files are stored in a separate drive, if you run into issues you aren’t able to fix, you can just wipe and reinstall, it maybe takes 20 minutes depending on your hardware, and while you’re experimenting and learning, it wouldn’t be uncommon for you to break some things.
Operating systems are rarely unstable. Users are the most common source of instability.
Recently endeavour changed the way they deal with some firmware related packages
Actually, that was Arch and as Endeavour uses the Arch repositories + the AUR, and their own repository for their additions, they were naturally affected.
If you run endeavour, you are basically getting Arch with a familiar installer, a few useful helper scripts, and a friendly community. You are still expected to know your hardware and your install. You are still expected to keep up with the Arch news, and make any manual interventions required. If you do that, endeavour is remarkably reliable.
Thanks for the advice, I will go ahead with trying mint first. Then a fedora to compare performance and a separate partition/drive for messing up arch/endeavour. Just have to disable bitlocker... Because that's how my last mint experience ended up xD
If Mint works for you, just stick with it. No need to try a different distribution to compare. You'll know when you need it.
I would only go to Fedora if you need it. For example newer drivers (kernel, mesa). Don't go change the kernel and/or mesa on a distribution, probably better to switch at that point. Or if you need KDE or GNOME for some reason. Wayland is disabled in Mint by default, but can be enabled. It's been over a year IIRC since they added experimental Wayland support so it may be fine by now.
Differences between Linux distributions are exaggerated.
There is also little reason not to try out different ones to compare if you want to. Nice to see what they are like for yourself if you have the time to.
So in essence i need something stable that is relatively easy to use and has great ue5 and gaming perf.
That is probably the most common set of requirements people ask for. In reality, with a few exceptions, there is really not that much difference between distros given those requirements. UE5 is newer so the biggest change there would be that you might find distros that ship newer versions of stuff might run it slightly better then distros that ship older software. In practice I think it has been out for long enough that you wont see much difference unless you want to play something new on the day of release (but these days those are all buggy messes anyway... not sure your choice of distro will make as big a difference as waiting a few weeks/months for the initial patches to rollout).
Remember, all distros are essentially based off the same software, the biggest difference being what desktop environment they ship with and what versions of software there ship (and how how long they stay on that version). By far the biggest difference you will see if what desktop environment they use and all distros essentially package the same set of desktop environments - each might come with different ones by default but they typically contain all the popular ones in their repos.
i need something stable... great gaming perf
In particular these two points. Do you know what you are asking for here? These are the most bland and wishy washy requirements. Everyone wants something stable and fast, never seen anyone ask for something that crashes all the time and is slow. But worst these tend to be on the opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of requirements, if you optimize for one you tend to trade off the other.
Even stability has multiple meanings. In terms of crash stability you will find all distros to be about the same. No one distro wants to ship buggy crashy software. But at times they do. And it is really just the luck of the draw as to when this might happen to you based on what software you use, how you configure your system and what hardware you have. Some combinations just don't work for some weird reason and you wont know until you hit it. This is why you hear some people claim one distro is a buggy mess while some other one is rock solid while someone else argues the exact opposite. All main stream distros are just as good as any other in terms of this and you are just unlucky if you ever do run into that type of issue. The biggest problems in this regard tends to be when a new major version of something comes out - but like with gaming it can be beneficial to wait a few months for any issues to be patched before jumping to the latest big distro version.
The other side of stability is API stability - or the lack of things changing over time as new versions of stuff get released. There are two main types of distros in this regard, point release distros which freeze major versions of packages between their major releases so you wont get any new features during the release cycle that version of the distro. Then you have to deal with all the breaking changes from newer versions of software once every so often when a new distro version comes out. Vs rolling release distros that upgrade major versions constantly and so generally follow a lot closer to the latest versions of things than point release distros. Really the big trade off here is not if you encounter breaking changes.
Any distro will need to deal with them at some point, the choice is how often you deal with them. You can wait years on the same version of a point release distro and only need to deal with all the breaking changes once every few years, or once every 6 months. Or you can deal with things as they come out with a rolling release distro. But while it might sound nice to only deal with it every few years it also means you need to deal with all the changes at once. Which can be much more disruptive when you do decide to. Quite often I find the slower upgrading distros are better off with just a full reinstall on the latest version than upgrading from one to the next. Personally I prefer dealing with small things frequently as they tend to be easier to fix and less disruptive over longer periods of time. When I was running kubuntu I used to end up reinstalling it ever 6 months as the upgrades never worked for me (though this was a long time ago), but my oldest arch install lasted probably probably 5-10 years or so.
And at the same time how frequently you get the latest versions of things means you get any performance optimizations and support for newer hardware or newer games as well. But also any bugs or regressions. It is a double edged sword. Which is why stability and performance tend to be a leaver you can tune between rather than two separate things to can achieve. Just like overclocking, the more performance you can get out of a system tends to result in the system becoming less stable overall. Everyone wants the most stable and fastest system, but in reality everyone has a different limit on how much or what types of stability they are willing to give up on to achieve different levels of performance.
But out the box, you will find most distros to be very much within a couple of % of each other and which is fastest will vary depending on which games you want to play and what hardware you have. But they all tend to have quite a bit of head room to optimizes for specific use cases as they all are optimizing for the general use case which is typically just trading off performance in one thing for another. But again, we are talking about tiny difference overall.
I am not afraid of some tech journey, but even though arch seems the coolest, with Wayland, kde, hyperland customization, i am not confident enough to use it for work.
The only way you will gain confidence in it is to try it out. But also, most distros use wayland these days and it is more up to the desktop environment you use rather than the distro you use. hyperland is a wayland compositor and is in the repos of most if not all major distros. You should be able to install it on anything really. You can replace the desktop environment or install multiple ones side by side if you want to on just about any distro. The biggest difference between them is which ones they come with by default. But really if you are looking for a highly customized experience then Arch tends to be the way to do as you have less extra fluff you have to remove or work around when getting the system exactly as you want it. The hardest part of Arch is installing it the first time. Really after that it is not any harder to use or maintain. IMO it is easier to maintain as you have a much better understanding of how you set up your system as you are the one that set it up to start with.
I heard it can completely crash your system if your a noob.
You can break any distro if you mess with things. The only big difference is Arch encourages/requires more messing around at the start then other distros. And IMO is easier to fix if you do mess things up - you can always just boot a live USB and reinstall broken packages or reconfigure things without needing a full reinstall again. You can basically follow the install guides again for the bits that are broken to fix just about anything. And that is only if you break something critical in booting. In my early days I broke (requiring a full reinstall) way more ubuntu installs then I have ever broken my Arch ones later on. It is really just about how much you want to tinker with things and how much you know about what you are tinkering with as to if they will break or not rather then what base distro you use.
And you can always try the install process and play around with different distros in a VM to get a feel for them and learn what they are like. So don't be afraid to try out various different ones and find the one you like the most. Your choice is never set in stone either. Just ensure you have good backups of everything you care about and the worst that will happen is you need to reinstall and restore your backups every once in a while.
Mint is great. It may not work for you if you have super new hardware.
Fedora is great. It’s mint but with newer stuff.
Arch is great. Bleeding edge. But it’s not “set it and forget it”.
Linux is great. There’s a million other options. Any of them work if they work for you. Find someone bashing Ubuntu - they would HAPPILY choose Ubuntu over win11.
And you have to realize the “what version I’m on dependency hell” thing is a thing of the past for the most part. Flatpaks just about solve this problem. You’ve got containers and vms too. Switching to another distro ain’t hard either as a nuclear option.
Just install mint or fedora like everyone says. Your requirements aren’t special, and both options are great.
I read a lot of advice online for distros, but my main needs are not really discussed.
You're not special and Linux distros aren't that specialized. They differ in packaging, upgrade philosophy, etc. There is no Linux distro that can't do the things others do.
You dabbled with Ubuntu. Stick with it, you'll be fine. Unless you really want mint, then go for it you'll be fine.
The urge to distrohop can be a distraction, but an itch that needs to be scratched now and then. I tend to always end up where I started, but when I do I feel better about it.
I would go with something ubuntu based or fedora. If you want to learn then Bazziteos may not be for you since it's ridiculously easy to figure stuff out on there. Instead, you might enjoy learning a system where you type some commands in the terminal like fedora or linux mint
If you're new to Linux, you won't stay with the distro anyone recommends for more than a month. It's a truism.
I'm not you. You're not me.
That said. Ubuntu isn't the Ubuntu of old. The real selling point is the zfs, but you have all the other NIH stuff like snap etc. I'm not a zfs fan but I appreciate that it's got a huge fan base.
One thing to say is that you don't have to have a one and only. I have at least two distros I use daily for workstation stuff. I use Fedora for typing and Arch for backups, debugging, rescue, and other fiddling about stuff (because Fedora gets in the way sometimes). Every distro has the same set of commands.
Coming from Windows, OK with a bit of tech journey and into gaming here is my take in no order of preference.
1) TuxedoOS if you are inclined to Debian/Ubuntu side. Slow updates but it has latest KDE and very stable in my experience. 2) If you just want set and forget (minimal updates) Linux Mint (Ubuntus fall here too) Now, it is not very appealing aesthetics. 3) Fedora. Probably the best overall, but if you have beef against IBM/Red Hat, ditch it, its superiority is very marginal. Gamers like the spin Nobara, some performance increase but minimal. 4) Arch is not that unstable as portrayed, but one time in a critical time is bad enough, even if very rarely occurs. You assess your risk. The popular baby today is Arch's CachyOS due to catering to gamers. 5) OpenSUSE's Tumbleweed is maintained quite good and very close to Fedora in being perfect overall, but fewer people behind and less support. I would only go with it if you have a specific reason why (German, Yast tools, rolling release but stable,...)
At the end, like many people say, it is likely you will hop... until one day you find that distro hoping is pointless and that all are actually very close to each other and could easily coexist with any of them all. The difficult and uncompromising aspect usually is with the desktop environment like KDE Plasma, Gnome, Cinnamon...
arch seems the coolest, with Wayland, kde, hyperland customization
While I have no experience with Unreal Engine, so I can't give an informed recommendation, I just figured I'd point out that you can do this with every distro
I don't recommend Bazzite. I'm far from an expert (I've only used Mint), but I see a lot of people recommending Bazzite. You should definitely test on Bazzite, but it's immutable and so that'll probably cause a lot of issues. I'd recommend strongly against Bazzite for gamedev.
I think basically any major distro will work (Ubuntu, Mint, OpenSUSE, Arch). ~~You'll probably need to run the software in bottles, so if it supports bottles then it should work for your needs~~. Only go with Arch if you're willing to sign up for some extra work.
Be sure to make backups. That way it won't matter if you brick your OS.
EDIT: It supports Linux, I was on the wrong page. ~~It explicitly supports Red Hat (Fedora) and Rocky Linux, OpenSUSE is similar to them, so go with one of those three I guess.~~
EDIT 2: They recommend Ubuntu. Test on Ubuntu and Rocky. I'd go with Rocky just because I hate Ubuntu (on an emotional level, I don't think they're evil or anything).
Oh I see, when you go straight to the Epic Games Store page it doesn't have a download for Linux and doesn't even say Linux is supported.
But that link says Red Hat Linux 8 or Rocky Linux 8, so OP should probably use Fedora or Rocky. Rocky's a bit of a no-name though so forum support might be lacking.
when a particular distro is recommended, almost every time it just means "this is what we have actually tested it on" so as long as your distro has the correct packages/versions available there is a very good chance it will work even when not recommended
It is immutable but ships with distrobox and boxbuddy, which lets you easily create linux containers with mutable systems (i.e. I am currently developing on a fedora container with Qt Creator, for example) and you can install your packages in that terminal.
No chances of breaking your main OS.
I set up my instance like follows:
Boxbuddy -> New distrobox container -> Fedora -> Give it a name.
Wait for the installation (should be about 300MB IIRC).
In the start menu you will now be able to run your instance's terminal (search for your instance name).
sudo dnf install qt-creator
Back in boxbuddy, in my instance I selected "show installed gui applications", selected Qt Creator -> Add to applications menu.
Qt Creator then shows up in the start menu (search for either Qt Creator, or your instance name).
It will run in the container, but has full access to your home directory for development.
I could then install all my other required packages from the same terminal that I installed qt-creator from.
Easy peasy.
Disclaimer: Typing from my phone. The instructions may not be exactly like I said, but those are the steps.
No terminal magic is needed in Bazzite to make this work.
For the new people on Linux, think of my impression playing with the different OS;
Similarities between Windows 10 and macOS is around 15%.
Similarities between Windows 10 and Linux Mint is around 20%.
Similarities between Linux Mint and Ubuntu is around 95%.
Similarities between Linux Mint and Fedora\OpenSUSE is around 90%.
Similarities between Linux Mint and Arch\CachyOS\Manjaro is around 85%.
And with Flatpaks/Snaps I would even now narrow the difference in the Linus OS as 95, 92 and 90% similarity. For what linux cannot do for you, unless it needs high processing or gaming anticheats, a Virtual Machine with Windows will just cover you without any problem.
What makes look different in Linux is the desktop environment (KDE, Gnome, Cinnamon...), no much the distro per se. Find the distro environment you like after playing 20min with it, and choose the Linux flavor you are ideologically/persuaded with the most... don't worry about the rest.
I want to recommend pop OS but it would be wise to switch to it after there is 24.04 (or later release)
In my personal experience pop os has been absolute rock solid especially with flatpaks However latest stable is quite old (they are working on new desktop environment before upgrade).
It's rare that a software compatibility is distribution specific but just in case for games you can verify with ProtonDB and for the rest WineHQ AppDB. That's assuming there is no native support which in this case according to a quick DuckDuckGo search returns linuxvox.com/blog/unreal-engin… indicating that it seems fine.
So... I'd suggest you pick whatever distribution you heard most about, if you are unsure I'd advise on Debian (Stable) but honestly I don't think it matters much. There might be slight difference in hardware support and performances but assuming you use mainstream hardware it hopefully should have minimal impact.
Regardless of what you choose, document the process and as long as you learn while doing it, you're going forward!
If you are in rush... maybe postpone the transition to after that project or do it with a 2nd computer.
Unreal Engine is a powerful and widely - used game engine developed by Epic Games. While it is well - known for its support on Windows and macOS, the Linux version of Unreal Engine also offers significant advantages.
Update: installed mint and i am excited so far. didn't test unreal yet, but gaming perf was great. Customization is really cool and i already got it to look modern with some theme icon combinations. Made a 🥭 in gimp as my home icon. Ran into very little issues so far. Except for one, where suspend instantly wakes up the pc and is therefore unusable. But i will figure that out another day.
Definitely update us on UE, I've haven't explored the EU or Unity on Linux, and it would be nice to know if they work, because "you can use Godot" doesn't work for everyone.
Except for one, where suspend instantly wakes up the pc and is therefore unusable. But i will figure that out another day.
Is this just an automatic suspend after inactivity? Because if so, I think it the inactivity timeout can be disabled in the settings menu, as a workaround until you can figure it out.
I got unreal working by simply unzipping the binaries you can download. It runs great, i would argue even faster then on windows (lumen enabled). Building an app in Linux worked out of the box. Some minor issues i had, left alt did not work. Figuring out how to make a launcher icon. After an update it needed new driver update aswell. Still no IDE to use C++ currently trying Rider.
Much better than I'd expected, that's great to hear! The minor bugs are always annoying, but like you mentioned, the speed boost hopefully outweighs it.
I’m looking at suse tumbleweed for an upcoming build. Ubuntu is getting obnoxious, mint is ugly and way behind on Wayland support and fedora I can’t really trust at this point as it’s a community version of a corporate American product. Like I could ignore the corporate stink before but -gestures broadly- not in this climate.
I liked arch but now that bcacheFS is getting yanked out of the kernel I don’t really have a reason to manually do so much myself anymore.
OpenSUSE, you can rollback your OS if an update, or your own mistake, borks it. GUI interface for a lot of stuff. It defaults to enforcing Secure Linux these days. This is a good thing but means extra steps if you want to access certain things remotely, so you can set it to complain or off, instead of the enforcing setting.
I am using openSuSE for production at work, and also on my private main machine. The "killer-app" that makes this distro outstanding is snapper (for snapshot rollbacks), which is tightly integrated. It has a rather steep learning curve somewhere between mint and arch. But it is probably the most mature and stable rolling release distro out there.
Yes, its really good, and every time somebody say "Linux needs ____ to make its use easy for new comers". My answer is typically uhm, openSUSE already has it.
That can be: - OneClick installs - GUI package management - GUI service and system settings - auto cleaning of btrfs
Welcome to a new issue of This Week in Plasma!
Every week we cover the highlights of what’s happening in the world of KDE Plasma and its associated apps like Discover, System Monitor, and more.
The day is soon approaching where Americans will have done American things so Americanly in America that we can't even say "What are we? A bunch of Asians?"
Their weapons suck. Piss away an obscene amount of money, can't even make a hypersonic missile, get a crap f-35,etc... Iran hits the genocide entity over plenty US ships and AD and they can't even stop the Houthi from hitting them LOL All they're good for is cowardly murdering and carpet bombing civilians from a safe distance.
Not so, the best weapons are useless in the hands of people lacking intelligence, strategy and knowledge about the enemy. This is why they have received a kick in the ass in each war.
I'm claiming that is irrelevant, even with the best weapons, if those who use this are ignorant about the people, culture and customs outside of the US. Now in Summer I see a lot of american tourists, here in south Spain, asking the people how they can go to see the Eiffel Tower and similar intelligent questions.
Trump with his good diplomacy capabilites even speaking with Mr.Japan. A good sign for me for the US ability to move in the international sphere. For the USA exist the USA and the rest is Mexico
Unfortunately I am also behind the invisible wall with 14% of the world's population. Who declare themselves 'the international community', with their great 'western values' such as imperialist wars, unconditional support for genociders and keeping immigrants out.
imperialist wars, unconditional support for genociders and keeping immigrants out.
What is the US doing currently. Sorry for the people living in the US, they have 2 options - Taking out the bastards, criminals and Billonarians outside the government - Or emmigrate to an civilized country, because the US is not and a danger for the whole world and the environment and the creator of this walled world
Wow, really Lemmy? Fuck bothsidesism. Fuck horseshoe theory leftists. Democrats suck, but one side is way fucking worse and causing way more damage. Would bet my life OP sat out the last election and is the literal reason why we’re here in the first place. God I hate tankies.
The reason the GOP won is because the DNC ran to the right in a country where the working class is increasingly radicalized. The largest block of society outright doesn't vote because they don't see a material difference in the outcome of the election, or because voting in their state doesn't matter as its solidly red or blue to begin with. Both parties support the bourgeoisie. Even if the DNC won, we would still be in the same mess, because the problems with our system is that it's a dying capitalist empire.
The only one supporting horseshoe theory is you, as you blame Marxists for the problems caused by both parties in a dying capitalist empire.
The DNC has also been actively socially pushing away one the largest voter demographics, white men.
All the messaging about white guilt, all men are toxic, and should pay reparations for the sins of people who did bad things 200 years ago is insane. Imagine telling a child "you parents did crimes, so you must also to go to jail".
Who's gonna vote for a party that seems to hates you? That's like asking the lgbt community to vote republican, a party activity trying to erase them.
The choice was vote for a party that hates you, or vote for a party that hates your friends.
If they truly wanted to win, they'd have to focus less on skin color and gender (but not ignore) and more on economical inequality. It shouldn't matter what skin color you have; if you need help, you get help.
Settler-colonialism is absolutely still a massive issue. It isn't a thing of the past.
The patriarchial structure of society still oppresses men and women everywhere.
You're erasing very real issues, strawmanning what people believe, and plugging your ears. This is the "I don't see color" problem, that's you ignoring systemic problems, not getting rid of them!
What your tactic would result in is a large portion of women, ethnic minorities, and queer folk being further alienated just to potentially win more white men, but that wouldn't happen either. Focus on liberation along all lines, economic, social, and more, and allow these coalitions to strengthen our position. You're furthering division by shutting down the voices of oppressed peoples, strawmanning what they say, just because its uncomfortable for you to hear.
Dems constantly let republicans get away with “causing more damage,” yet never seem capable of helping the working class when they get voted back into power. It’s so disingenuous, at least Republicans are honest about their evil intentions. But sure, vote harder next election sweetie, and if you vote hard enough the still not prosecuted Orange Traitor will just cancel the election altogether.
We will do it ourselves. Fuck governments and institutions. We can literally pull resources together and fix things ourselves, just need a focus point and consensus.
They could have helped us by including the public option in the bill, as it was originally designed to include by republican Mitt Romney. Instead, they simply used it as an opportunity to shovel 25 million Americans right into the pockets of insurance companies. Then-senator Biden dropped the public option before negotiations even began, as a “show of good faith to his esteemed Republican colleagues.” They left the insurance requirement in though, and even tried to add a system where we had to report it with taxes if we wanted refunds.
The part BBB is fucking up is honestly a travesty to begin with. It’s what allows Walmart to operate without insuring their employees, specifically training them to earn under certain amounts and work limited hours so that they can go on Medicare instead of the giant multinational corporation paying their fair share for their employees’ health.
Do you see the pattern here? Fuck these corporations for buying our government and using it against us to rob us blind. Both parties do help them with this, and it has got to stop because we’re at a breaking point.
Apart from that I am looking for a solution to a personal issue (see my other comment), I posted this because I was thinking this could be a great way to support other new Linux users and friends.
When I tried RustDesk it was not able to easily function on headless systems, including servers and my desktop PC if the monitor was powered off. Has that changed?
Anydesk and Teamviewer don't have that problem, but both companies have had hacking incidents and Teamviewer actually blamed their users instead of taking responsibility. Allowing 3rd parties of any type remote access to my computers is IMO just asking for trouble, especially for always-on systems.
Wireguard plus VNC isn't as seamless but it works fine the vast majority of the time. When I occasionally need features that VNC doesn't support, NoMachine is a full-featured, free for non-commercial use alternative that works great with WG.
Edit: It looks like the latest release of NoMachine now offers a intermediate network service that operates like Teamviewer and Anydesk. Access via intermediate network ID is not enabled by default, so with it disabled it should theoretically be more secure than the other apps.
I remote to a Mint on a laptop with a closed screen, and pop_OS that doesn't have a screen. (Second one has my jellyfin server). Connecting from my android phone and even my Windows laptop at my last job
Yeah if you still run into an issue for some reason add a virtual monitor in Windows, or "sudo rustdesk --option allow-linux-headless Y" (it's in the GUI as well) and it should take care of it, but I haven't had to do that
Ah, I haven't tried Apple products. Works with Mint, Android, PopOS, Debian, without any tinkering in my experience. I remote from my phone to my media server/laptop/and other junk when needed.
I assume only as long as remote is using adequate number of physical monitors? Or can one run a virtual guest with a single virtual monitor and then use as many monitors as host has?
I was talking with my brother who was supporting our mother on her Windows laptop. He was using TeamViewer for years but that company now requires to subscribe to an expensive license on top of this is a really security- and privacy-sensitive kind of access.
His main requirements are that the new solution are:
safe
very easy to use for the supported person
better works without VPN, public ports etc though this isn't mandatory.
So, it needs to be easy. I was first thinking in VNC but while I have been using TigerVNC for years in Home Office, this looks not exactly as easy as TeamViewer.
Last week was talking with our stand-in admin at work who turns out to know Linux well. He said he has very good experiences with RustDesk, uses it for home office and also for remotely accessing Windows machines.
There was some concerns about where it was being developed, I think it's entirely Chinese devs.
Ha, I am thinking since a while that for preventing one's internet access being hacked by a foreign power, it's probably best to chain an American-made router with a Chinese one so that they can firewall each other 😉
Such attacks against infrastructure are to be taken serious. But the xz-utils case and Stuxnet also have shown a few things:
Such attacks are incredibly time-consuming and expensive to mount.
Once sn attacker hits such a target, they have blown their powder - they can't continue to use it.
The xz-utils case shows that open source's many-eyed principle works astoundingly well.
xz-utils also confirms that in open source software, you can close a detected backdoor within hours - even if the maintainer of the software does not want that, since you can fork it in seconds. (And using Rust only makes this easier).
So, this topic of foreign state-actor backdoors is less a thing for individuals to worry about. (I agree that lawmakers of democratic states should absolutely worry about this, here a good article be Bert Hubert on the topic.)
However what is actually dangerous is the erosion of privacy and the rising amount of mandated surveillance. But if one is worried about that, one should not use closed-source software in the first place.
I also avoided it for some of these reasons, but in the end it was just the setup that got messy. I ended up using Sunshine/Moonlight for an overall nicer experience. I can use it to stream games if I’ve got a good connection, or toss it in low bandwidth mode for remote admin work. I run it behind Tailscale to access it from anywhere, it supports Wayland, it’s all fully open source, and I’m very happy with the setup.
I host Apache Guacamole on my server, and then VNC/RDP/SSH on the various PCs and servers on my network, so I can connect to them from anywhere, as long as I have a browser, my password manager and my 2-factor auth.
I have used many different RDP's, but RustDesk seems the best option. Yesterday I had to configure my Steam Deck and I am glad that RustDesk can be found in the Discover software manager.
I ran a Rustdesk server and it is constantly unreliable. It's very likely it's my fault and I lack the skills to fix it. I just decided to use Anydesk instead.
The poll found that more than 60 percent of all voters now support deportation of undocumented migrants, with Hispanic voters showing a notable uptick. In contrast, 34.7 percent opposed deportations, and four percent were unsure. Among Hispanic voters, 50 percent supported deportations and 48 percent opposed. There was a seven percent increase in overall support since May among this demographic, with an 11 percent rise among those who said they "strongly support" the policy. Among Black voters, 53 percent supported deportations, while 37 percent opposed. Overall support among this demographic increased by three percent since May. Meanwhile, support among White voters was 65 percent, while 31 percent opposed. Overall support fell by three percent since May.
The percentage of Hispanic voters that strongly support deportations of people in the U.S. illegally rose by 11 percent in two months, according to a new poll.
Cool. We all should support the legal process to deal with people who have broken laws.
Now ask if they support picking people up off the street and throwing them into foreign jails without ever having to provide any evidence that they’re here illegally. Or even when we know for a fact that people are here legally, if they support arresting them and kicking them out too.
I’m exhausted with this fucking bullshit. No one supports people breaking the laws.
Ask people if they support the constitution and if they believe the government is free to ignore it.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (July 9, 2025) – Cygnal, one of the nation’s fastest growing and most accurate private polling firms, released the following monthly National Voter Trends (NVT) poll (conducted July 1-2) of 1,500 likely 2026 midterm election voters.
The crime angle on immigration was always made up. Crime rates where lower than average among this group. So if you deport that group crime rates would go up.
I literally know undocumented immigrants that wanted other undocumented immigrants to be caught by ICE so there is more jobs left for them and rent prices go down for them, according to what they said. Individualism has made people cut throat af.
Opinion only. But my guess is individualism grew from a increase in cut throat people.
Capitalist billionaires gaining control of world governments. Then using it to move the world to a modern reinteretation of feudalism. Is IMHO the actual cause of the increase.
The capitalists have always had control of governments within capitalism. States are not distinct from the ruling class, but an extension. What we are seeing is not a shift from capitalism to neofeudalism, but the consequences of the dying stages of capitalism before socialism. Capitalism has decayed and is dying due to monopolization and centralization of capital, and due to imperialism, but these same conditions prep capitalism for revolution and collective ownership and planning, into socialism.
In theory. And if you look at post war UK. It Def lead to a greater support for socialism, the forming of new party etc. removing our past 2 party system with a different one. The very one that no longer supports socialism.
But socialism cannot and will not grow it of nowhere. The US has never had a large support for it. The UK and much of Europe had people with respect pushing socialism in the 50 to 60. Ex soldiers seeing a whole new way of doing things built the very socialism we understand now.
The US just dose not have anyone effectively making arguments for this. Without such leaders. And honestly we also have non effective left in Europe anymore either.
Add to that. Their is absolutely no evidence of capitalism losing control. It is actually doing very well by it's own standards. As instead ideas like socialism are losing power while capitalism is effectively moving wealth into the hands of the few and most powerful.
It is only failing by the opinion of those of us that disagree with it.. and expecting that to start socialism without some major change. Is just wishful thinking.
This is a very myopic, eurocentric point of view. Capitalism in the global north is sustained by imperialism. The global south, and its suffering, is what keeps prices artificially low in the global north. This system is crumbling, and disparity is rising faster than ever in the global north as a consequence. Countries like Burkina Faso are kicking out occupiers like France, and BRICS is gaining as the west is falling in relevance.
Further, the UK did not go socialist, unless I'm misreading your meaning. Socialism, as it exists in the real world, can be found in countries like the PRC, Cuba, and former USSR. I'm not talking about welfare.
Further, the US is seeing normalization of socialism. Mamdani may be a socdem, but has implied a far more socialist line, ie collectivizing production. The assassination of the United Healthcare CEO is being met with united support among the working class, and parties like the Party for Socialism and Liberation are reporting record member growth.
Opinions aren't what drive social change, material conditions evolving and changing do. The material conditions of capitalism in the west are declining, and socialism is gaining. The global south is increasingly throwing off the shackles of imperialism. If you take a very myopic, eurocentric view, then it can be easy to only see companies getting larger and larger and disparity rising, but if you zoom out this very system is pushing the profit motive and capitalism with it to the brink.
Imperialism is the highest stage of the capitalist mode of production, in which monopolies and cartels become the prevalent economic force of society. Lenin synthesized...
But what are the conditions that are changing? Do we have all the information?
Capitalism is not the only process at play. Settler ontology will nurse capitalism back to health because the supposed weakening of capitalism isn't going to upend material settler realities in a way that forcloses it's usual reactions.
And furthermore, imperialism has not collapsed. There is no reason to believe the BRICS, or any other contemporary developments, actually challenges imperialism meaningfully. We should remind ourselves that there have been moments when people feared the collapes, and even when people suffered catastrophic collapse before. Capitalism remains. Settler-colonialism remains. Imperialism remains. All because we have no clue what America is and are incapable of addressing it without reconsituting it in new ways.
All very fair points, comrade. Ultimately, even if we can see the US on a downward spiral and countries like the PRC on the rise, we can't know for sure how this will pan out. All the more reason to get organized, rather than wait and see.
I don't disagree with the birth of capitalism. Although it is basically a new name for imperialism. It is the obvious effect of the post fudal middle class becoming the leadership post aristocratic rule. But it can also be an idea independent of its birth and leadership.
Where I disagree that anything currently existing can push those processes towards socialism. BRICC members are far from a socialist majority. Most nations in BRICC are equally supporting of the ideas of Capitalism. At least the ideas sold by those that use it for imperialism.
It is entirely possible. (Although far from probable) That BRICCs or a descendent from it. Will lead to the global south rising to take over from the current western default rule.
But for that future to be socialist it will need the leadership of those nations to think on socialist ways. And most simply do not do so ATM. Nor dose any probable event indicate a change in how these nations would run the world economy.
Unfortunately for Socialism to thrive. Yes you need opinions to have a major effect on world politics. Without it socialism as an ideal is impossible.
I'm not misunderstanding you, I simply disagree with you and your frame of analysis. Not everyone you speak to that disagrees is misunderstanding you, same with me.
You have a very idealist frame of analysis. Capitalism's persistence is not due to ideas, but material conditions. The compulsion for socialism isn't something won over because some people have socialist ideas, but because capitalism necessarily paves the way for socialism and creates its own demise.
Plus, the PRC is the largest economy in BRICS, and is a socialist country. Even if your frame of analysis requiring BRICS to have large socialist elements to supplant capitalism was correct, it's already correct, China eclipses every other economy in BRICS.
I have a few coworkers that are Mexican and one that is Puerto Rican and all of them would happily help deport their neighbors because in their eye they’re one of the good ones.
Tempo fa, un amico mi chiese: "Perché preoccuparsi tanto della privacy in rete? Tanto se vogliono, ti fregano lo stesso".
Gli risposi: "È come avere una bella auto. La lasci incustodita, con le chiavi nel quadro, magari a finestrini aperti … o la tieni nel box, con antifurto e telecamere? Certo, se vogliono, la rubano ugualmente, ma devono essere preparati e attrezzati per farlo, non dei rubagalline qualsiasi".
China, Brazil sign deals to expand cooperation Asia News Network (ANN) is the leading regional alliance of news titles striving to bring the region closer, through an active sharing of editorial content on happenings in the region.
That's exactly what China is doing though. This is classic reverse psychology. USA hasn't even got a single trade deal, this is just China reminding everyone how stupid USA threats are.
Your kernel must be patched with ntsync patches. If your system does not have /dev/ntsync then your kernel does not have the patches required to use ntsync.
Some applications, mostly 32 bit, may also need PROTON_USE_WOW64=1 when using ntsync
Added ntsync support:
Enable with PROTON_USE_NTSYNC=1
NOTES:
1. Your kernel must be patched with ntsync patches. If your system does not have /dev/ntsync then your kernel does not have the patc...
When he says "PROTON_FSR4_UPGRADE=1" and "PROTON_USE_NTSYNC=1" etc, does he mean these are launch commands I need to add to my games? Or do I just need to use the version of proton and those things will get enabled?
nice! i just updated to the 9000 series myself! specifically for this reason.
it just has made such great leaps in the realms of FSR and encoding.
i can attest, FSR4 looks incredible. i'm using it on Lies of P, which you just need the parameter for. any game with FSR3 support you only need the parameter.
i'm also using it on Returnal. Returnal only has FSR2, so for games like that, you need some assistance from OptiScaler.
you can scope out my video here as an example if you want to see!
lol it's really not bad. its bark is worse than its bite. XD
ok, CyP2077. looks like it has FSR3 already, that's good. so add this launch parameter in steam:
PROTON_FSR4_UPGRADE=1 %COMMAND%
and set it to FSR3 in-game.
that should auto download the FSR4 dll to the game folder and you'll be good to go. note that the settings in game will still say FSR3, but it will be FSR4, since FSR4 only needs a dll drop-in to update from FSR3.
Those are environment variables. To use them you need to add %command% after them in games' launch options (e.g. PROTON_FSR4_UPGRADE=1 PROTON_USE_NTSYNC=1 %command%).
Good question! There are hundreds of good resources, some of which include Privacy Guides and my friends at Punching Up Press (they have a lot of other good infographics). Naomi Brockwell TV is a YouTuber with some great beginner friendly videos to guide you step by step. Let me know if you're interested in others!
This could have two meanings, one of which I figure I should address: 1. If you mean "size of the userbase for an app," then yes, even projects that fly under the radar are much more secure than "mainstream" options. That's the main purpose of this infographic. 2. If you mean "physical size of the app on the infographic," the reason they're different sizes is simply because they were hard to fit on one page, and this made it look nice ;)
Proton VPN and Mullvad VPN are both open source, meaning their code can be publicly audited to make sure they're upholding their standards of privacy and security. Furthermore, Proton VPN offers a free tier. These are the main 2 reasons. NordVPN only protects your privacy against other websites, not NordVPN themselves. Hope this helps! Let me know if you want more details.
Edit: Mullvad VPN can also be paid for in cash/Monero, and they don't ask for any personal information to use it (not even a username!)
Being open source doesn’t uphold a lot of standards of privacy and security for VPNs. It’s not useless, but the most common worry about VPNs is traffic logging, and open source apps do nothing to prevent this since it’s server side. ProtonVPN and Mullvad VPN don’t protect from themselves, and they can keep logs. The reason they’re commonly recommended is that they’re more trusted in the privacy community in general. Obscura VPN and Nym VPN do mostly protect from themselves because they’re a two-hop VPN. In the case of Obscura VPN, it’s a first hop through their servers, and a second hop through Mullvad’s. So to associate your traffic with your IP address, Obscura and Mullvad would need to cooperate, which is quite a bit less likely than a single VPN operator logging user traffic.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Nord. They are kind of disliked here because they’re not open source and they did a lot of commercials not long ago. Despite all that, they’ve publicly reported multiple third-party audits of their code, which I think is a good thing.
I just think the most trustworthy VPN is the one no one is talking about. NordVPN is a sponsor on every single YouTube video. They are mainstream. I don't trust mainstream. Mullvad has proven they don't keep logs. They are simple. They don't even have accounts. A 16 digit number is all you get to login. No pass. No email. No ties to you. You fill your subscription like quarters in a meter.
They don’t use Signal though. They use a clone called TeleMessage Signal which logs and archives all their messages on an Israeli server, and which a hacker was able to access before the service was suspended.
You can’t really help if someone forks and misuses software.
Some of those mentioned likely are compromised, but cannot figured out which. The thing, is to diversify our risk and the privacy minded to use different platforms (Proton VPN and Mullvad VPN for instance).
The good news, is that if an agency is compromising something, they will likely won't use the intel gathered in court cases in order to leave it open to future prey, so that is good for vast majority of users. The very few that are relevant enough should not trust even the genuine privacy tools and resort to enhanced methods and combining methodologies.
My impression, and just impression, is that I would trust Tuta **more than Proton (and not because Proton's CEO that many interpreted wrong anyways) On VPN... a tad more trust on **Mullvad. Signal, I would not use it for high stakes communication but OK for most people. GrapheneOS seems okay and we know for sure it does not leak info on a daily basics, but we have to be careful, it could have an obscure code dormant waiting for a trigger or could easily send data to an unsuspected server, Ironically, if I were Snoden, I would feel more comfortable using a Huawei Mate with HarmonyOS than a Pixel 9 with GrapheneOS... of course China spies too massively, but it has far less beef with Snoden than the US does, therefore not of much interest to Beijing.
Remember that overwhelming majority of FOSS goes without any audit, let alone a comprehensive one. This is what some trusted party should put AI checking ASAP all the FOSS out there!
Very interesting insights. Funnily I use all of the services you cautiously recommend, including GrapheneOS, but not HarmonyOS, hard pass on that one. As a German I am also legally required to prefer Tuta. 😀 I still have that OG 1€/Month contract.
Edit: Your last point is a good idea, although I think the more popular an open source app is, the less likely it is to be malicious. A lot more eyes on it and the xz backdoor was caught pretty much immediately.
Of course... for us normies... GrapheneOS is the way to go. Very high targeted individuals in the West should however consider HarmonyOS. Of Course the Chinese government has eyes on that one but not specifically targeting you... unless they use it to trade intel on someone of high interest for China but no much collaboration between West and China intelligence agencies today...
True, popularity increases the chances someone auditing. But, to a point. Ideally audit should be performed with every single update and on the servers, and there the premise of more eyes does not hold true no more. Then it comes trust. In a company like Tuta, the people behind showed their faces from day one, the same people are there, is a tight team so harder for a bad apple to do something. Considering both Tuta and Proton were good from inception (and I believe it may be the case), it would probably would be easier for an intelligence agency to penetrate Proton than Tuta, just for the structure that appears they have from outside. Now, Tuta made a horrible mistake once! In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, independently of one's take on it, Tuta made the "Standing with Ukraine" (March 2022); that was a mistake, it may many doubt if privacy still their paramount over any other ideology. Maybe they have change since since no statements on Gaza... or maybe they agree with what is happening... who knows... that is why they should not make any statements at all, or clarify that while they have their ideologies in no case, ever will compromise their stands on privacy. To be fair, Proton did the same... nothing on Ukraine but on Gaza "We unequivocally condemn the terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israeli civilians […] We also condemn violence against civilians in Gaza"; so I guess both are comparable here! My trust for both is slim, as a company, and even their individuals.
For Proton it is the "tech bro"-y feeling and for Signal it is wondering about financing. Also, if you are paying for your own audits there is an obvious conflict of interest.
I'm sorry - paying for an audit is somehow a conflict of interest? How exactly is that?
As someone who had to contract auditing firms every year, and personally sign off in their report as part of our compliance, I would love to hear how I should have ....what? Won the audit lottery? Applied for some sort of government assistance? Prayed to an audit fairy godmother?
Who the F else is paying for our audit? I want free audits! I bet everyone does.
My guess is they think that since you're paying for the audit the auditors won't bust you for fraud, which is cute, since the auditors are asked to audit specific things that the company asks them to audit. They're not released on the company like witch hunters, with wide open access to everything, cutting a swathe through fraud and criminality while people are furiously burning documents in the basement. So there is no conflict of interest, since the auditors are looking at what the people using them are asking them to look at.
I know, it's just kind of laughably shouting they don't know what either an audit or conflict of interest actually are.
The hardest part some times is finding an audit firm that isn't stupid expensive, but also won't do a shit job and give you a report that looks like some knock-off free LLM didn't write it to maximize their own payday. I love a good audit report with findings, it means I didn't waste money. But my shit is (well, was, at another place years back) locked down tight, so we didn't ever expect anything terrible.
Same here, everyone was so stressed about "the audit" but we had written common sense processes and executed them as needed, with mechanisms in place to flag potential areas for improvement if we found gaps.
Bitcoin's Lightning Network has onion routing for privacy, like Tor.
When Bitcoin had a bug that allowed some guy to give himself a bazillion bitcoin, it was detected and patched before he was able to sell them. When Monero encounters a similar bug, it will only be detectable by the price going down.
I'm not super knowledgeable on how anonymous such routing us, hence I avoid it.
Don't know why people bombarded you so much - the other side of total anonymity is that you really never know if anything got broken and someone earned off it.
My suggestion, however, is to use Monero for payments, and not as a store of value.
This is the correct initial reaction but given the extent to which the US monitors every single transaction everyone makes, it's getting awful hard to manage the influx of feral hogs without having them streaming through your door.
For starters, it's open source. And I'm not too into the details, but the creator of Anubis even mentioned that they were interested in creating a non-javascript version for privacy.
Google's reCaptcha, to which Anubis is being compared to by OP, is obviously far less private. It's just another mechanism of control and data harvesting for Google. One of the ways that they determine if you're malicious/human or not is to check if you have a Google cookie in your browser and are signed in. Not to mention fingerprinting (hardware and software info), browsing data, AI training ironically enough (the fucking streetlights), etc etc.
Anubis is relevant here because it is more private, among other things.
But you do know that Tor/VPN is not really privacy, nor security? It hides your IP, but that's about it. If you still login, and give any information, and that could just be your "fingerprint" you are not anonymous...
VPNs know who you are and what websites you visit, so no privacy nor anonymity there. With Tor... It's complicated. That's why we have guides like this: blog.nowherejezfoltodf4jiyl6r5…
I2P is king here but it has a limitation that makes it stronger but less practical. I2P doesn’t generally do outproxies. A few exist but they typically aren’t trusted or used. Instead, I2P tries to keep private by only routing around traffic the originated within its own network rather than piping things from clearnet from one place to another. An issue with arrives that do that is you can see traffic from a honey pot going into a black box and with enough monitoring where it ends up leaving that black box. It’s very difficult to track traffic flow within the network but once it jumps back into clear net you can find it again.
Now while you can argue that it doesn’t come out on clearnet, just originates from there, I counter that with Microsoft Windows telemetry, it might as well be clearnet. Windows is the dominant player at the moment so it’s most likely the traffic ends up on a windows machine. There are really benefits behind the telemetry date but they also means there’s a single point an authoritarian regime can apply pressure to to monitor whatever they want. With advances in AI, chewing through tons of collected data is much easier to do, so the idea of “they can’t stop all of us” is ridiculous. They will just pick off the undesirables in smaller chunks.
Ultimately nothing is completely safe but if you really value privacy, make yourself such an enormous pain in the ass that monitoring you becomes a chore.
Encryption is a type of security, and Tor/VPNs encrypt your traffic. Accessing .onion sites over Tor is (at least in theory) more secure than accessing clearnet sites.
Do you know what your fingerprint is? And all the ways you are being tracked that is not about your IP?
You do give personal info to every website you visit - with the exception of a very few, who respect your privacy. If you think you need to log in, to give personal info, then you are sadly misinformed.
Pretty sure banks have a pretty good track record of "keeping your money safe". Why the fork would anybody trust banks to keep their money safe if they can't keep your money safe?
I don't really understand why that statement is even on there?
Unless you mean to argue some anonimity point, which I could agree with considering e.g. Monero would be more anonymous than a bank.
But safe? I'd say the bank is quite safe to store money.
Money in the bank can be seized and frozen for all sorts of reasons. If you're in the USA, then police can charge your money with a crime even if you haven't broken any laws. It's safe until it's not.
Can confirm. about 15 years ago, my bank account was frozen for 3 weeks for child-support enforcement. Only they weren't talking about my kid or even me. Some dude in Florida with my same first and last name was a deadbeat dad. So they froze my account because apparently, he didn't have a bank account or something.
What's super annoying about it is that we had different middle names, not even close to the same social security number, and not one person even contacted me before my bank account was frozen. I only found out because a check I wrote or something bounced. And I was like, WTF?
I was finally able to talk to enough bank people to clear it up. But it took 3 weeks. I never got an apology for it either. And the fuckers did not refund my insufficient funds fee. I mean, it was only $15 bucks, and it would have cost me more than that in my time to get a refund, but still...
Doesn't have to be in the bank either; if you're traveling with your life savings in cash, then if you get pulled over cops are likely to seize that money. Just because fuck you, that's why.
Banks keeping your money safe depends on what country you live in and how much its government has regulated them and/or provided some sort of backup in the case of a run or the bank going out of business.
The intention was more "Banks keep my data safe," but I wanted to provide a clearer explanation that if your data isn't safe, neither is your money. I didn't have enough room to put my full thoughts.
It's not about what you use, but how you use it. PEBCAK Almost 100% privacy and security is offline at home, reading a book, if you bought the book with cash and not online and/or with credit card.
the codebase itself? besides XNU, nobody... but, given the immense amount of scrutiny placed on the software, if there was some magic backdoor (an intentional one, anyway, not talking about like NSO group RCEs 'n shit), don't you think we'd know?
the average person doesn't even know what grapheneos is. if they're either going to buy an iphone, or some generic android phone running a vendor kernel that hasn't been patched this administration, i'd want them to buy the iphone.
moi: "not talking about like NSO group RCEs 'n shit"
tu: "how do you think pegasus works"
you could have at least picked a different cyberwarfare company...
by that logic, every OS under the sun has massive backdoors. bugs exist, man. my point was that for the average person, a fully-patched ithing is going to be among the more secure options.
wasn't Pegasus attack vector sms how is it a OS issue if its a protocol its the same as saying Linux is insecure because xmpp had a vulnrabilty and allowed remote access
depends on the chain in question. some used iMessage as a way in, but (at least in the case i'm thinking of rn) it was only used to trigger an image parsing bug. in others, sms was used to trick someone into clicking a link, exploiting a bug in JavaScriptCore.
Yes and no. It’s certainly better than stock android. You won’t find anyone who says otherwise. But it creates unnecessary dependancies on apple’s ecosystem and Apple can’t be trusted. Nothing with shareholders can be trusted. Apple might be an ally today but they are a US based-company operating within the confines of what the US will let it do.
All their cloud services are pretty poorly protected too. Every year or so me and my friends will find Chinese gibberish entries in our calendars that link to phishing sites. These get cleaned up eventually but it proves that Apple is lying about not being able to access your shit.
I’m planning my exodus from the Apple ecosystem and looking at grapheneOS but I’m still in the skeptic stage. I have lots of cloud decoupling to do and my self hosting ambitions are big so at the moment my iPhone isnt the biggest priority to change out.
Every year or so me and my friends will find Chinese gibberish entries in our calendars that link to phishing sites.
D@mn! That was an absolute PITA. In my experience, my calendars and contacts never synced properly anyway so I went to the Proton ecosystem a few years ago.
Anyway, thank you for sharing. I only know one other person who had the same problem and we both thought we were going nuts.
The Proton CEO is quite active in twitter and participates in podcasts. Well, one day he praised one action of the Trump administration on antitrust and a whole community attacked him for "praising Trump" when he did only a nomination for Attorney General for the Antitrust division. I highly doubt he is a MAGA supporter and listening to him for 30min on any of the multiple appearances he was on, will confirm you that. Several things concerns me on Proton, the CEO's ideology ain't one of them.
Unrelated to this, I wish people was more forgiven of Trump voters, it is not the monolithic the Left tries to portray it is. Trump sold himself as fighting the establishment, being anti-war and pro-antitrust (many small business owners supported him). People voted for him even suspecting he most likely was lying. Many people, both in 2016 and 2024, voted for Trump because Hillary was very pro-war (for instance she say she would attack Russian military directly in Syria) and Kamala proudly said she would not change anything on Biden's policy in the middle of Gaza's massacres. MAGA has many racists, many! (Democrats has is share too, but usually quieter but one can notice them at the grocery stores!) But what made Trump win was desperate disfranchised Americans with no other alternatives that promised Change. Europeans should keep quiet too... in the last elections they voted as different as they could demanding change to end up with Ursula von der Leyen for another term. Democracies in both sides of the Atlantlic are heavily ill and people, in desperation, vote for whoever promises change, independently of anything else.
I wish people was more forgiven of Trump voters, it is not the monolithic the Left tries to portray it is. Trump sold himself as fighting the establishment, being anti-war and pro-antitrust (many small business owners supported him)
Be prepared to accept accusations of being a fascist Nazi for saying this. You're right, but Lemmy is so extreme on this subject, that if you aren't with the majority, then you're an evil nazi pig--regardless of reality.
I still get accused of it and all I did was vote third party in the election. 9 months ago! lol
Screw me! I feel bad because instead of welcoming those now disenchanted MAGA, we are shunning them away and pushing them toward Musk's new party and the like. We did same mistake after Trump's 1st term too.
Agreed. Lots of missed opportunities, and Lemmy is also shunning away their allies against Trump by overusing the words Nazi and Fascist to describe every poster that disagrees with Democrats. My gf, who is very very anti-Trump, lasted on Lemmy one day. One day!
She said it was way too hateful and political. lol
I feel bad even recommending it to her, and I don't recommend it to any of my friends anymore.
Lemmy will die in a few years because of it's extremism. It's already slowing down. But I'll ride it to the end to prove to people that they didn't bully me off of it. 😀
Let me know if you find a better venue... I am also disappointed in Lemmy. Is it so hard to find a place where people try to understand why things are one way and another before slapping each other.
I'd lived in a very swing state, in a very swing county and thanks to that predicted elections like no pollster did (even Trump in 2016 as he came down a escalator and every media laughed at him)... I saw no more malice in an average Trump voter than a Kamala one, I find a portion of them both as equally racist (some 30% I would say), one just is more vocal and explicit while the other chooses to express the racism passively aggressive.... Two black family moved into our street and one Trumper told me that he does not like the "blacks in front" and a long time Democrat neighbor told me instead... that she was going to move to a better school district "because demographics"... what is the difference?
Let me know if you find a better venue… I am also disappointed in Lemmy.
I still love Lemmy, and my main Lemmy instance. But ugh, everything is getting so political and extreme everywhere. I'm trying to transition into just posting my writing and staying in writing communities, but my reputation proceeds me (still no regrets and I still believe in everything I said) and things can downgrade pretty quick.
And if I came up with an alt name, people would recognize my writing and say I was ban-evading.
So ugh, we'll see. I'm trying to just stay out of everything political, but people mention my fucking name all the time anytime someone talks about "trolls." And I never back down when I get false accused. lmao
Of course, Lemmy is an amazing FOSS tool, just sad many people (if so) are a bit toxic... Of course, I was blamed in the past as troll, bot, pro-putin, pro-china, pro-european, pro-american... and few actually get involved in a insightful conversation. The way i see it, Lemmy (or any of these mediums) are just entertainment and our work should be in the real world, with your neighbors and physical communities.
haha, thanks! Yeah, I was feeling creative that day. I figured, "Hey, I should make a Lemmy song!" You reminded me of it, so I posted it to a nerdcore comm just now. lol
I'm with ya. I LOVE the decentralized nature and concept of Lemmy. Just wish some of the more extreme rhetoric would die down. Because this would make a great creative space. People should def not take it quite so seriously and spend more time outside.
But as an aside, I just had a talk with one of the admins for my instance, and it was a great convo and they are supported of creatives here. So right now, feeling good.
I think the issue is that too many people think they can social-media post their way back to the Biden-era. Although in this particular Lemmy instance there's also the pro-Russia stuff (that's a different beast, and I don't know where it comes from).
There's no solution to our political crisis that doesn't involve touching grass.
Incorrect. It just means someone has to throw money at proton to get that data instead of throwing at ISPs and marketing nuts. They are subject to the same capitalistic pressures as anyone else.
vpns are not anonymous just instead of your isp getting your internet traffic the vpn does theres also not a real way to verify what there doing on there servers unless your sitting inside of the datacenter monitoring it vpns where never supposed to be anonymous
where's the shovel and double-ziplocs to bury your cash, silver, gold, platinum, and palladium? or the zippo to burn your prints off? get on my level, ho
This is original content. AI was not used anywhere except for the bottom right image, simply because I could not find one similar enough to what I needed. This took around 6 hours to make.
Transcription (for the visually impaired)
(I tried my best)
The background is an iceberg with 6 levels, denoting 6 different levels of privacy.
The surface section of the iceberg is titled "As seen on TV" with a quote beside it that says "This video is sponsored by...". The logos depicted in this section are: - NordVPN - Bitdefender - Incogni - Malwarebytes - Opera GX - ExpressVPN
The lowest portion of the iceberg is titled "The Ghost". There is a quote beside it that has been intentionally redacted. The images depicted in this section are: - A cancel sign over a mobile phone, symbolizing "no electronics" - An illustration of a log cabin, symbolizing "living in a log cabin in the woods" - A picture of gold bars, symbolizing "paying only in gold" - A picture of a death certificate, symbolizing "faking your own death" - An AI generated picture of a person wearing a black hoodie, a baseball cap, a face mask, and reflective sunglasses, symbolizing "hiding ones identity in public"
ClamAV is an open source antivirus, but I would recommend against using an antivirus altogether due to their invasive nature. You shouldn't need one with proper sandboxing and isolation.
ClamAV is slow to get updates and frankly not a great tool to use. AV is a must as isolation and sandboxing are only as good as the next exploit. Not too mention scams like phishing are not stopped by isolation.
It’s also a shit product riding on marketing laurels from its past glory days, like Norton. It leaves pieces behind that can cause malware to come roaring back.
It isn’t hard to just nuke a system or restore a backup people.
I'll go further than this and say that true security is where everybody has support enough to not want to steal your shit, hack you etc.
Yeah corporations and governments are still a problem, for now, but both of the above parties would be far more secure if they did mutual aid, supported progrms to help the impoverished etc etc.
Basically having a collective approach to security and not such a myopic individualistic one.
Any compliant commercial service will share user data with authorities - you don't get to operate a company and skip local laws. That's a non argument.
What's important is what "user details" they had on hand to share. If I create my service in such a way that I have zero data about you except some random useless string, I can "hand over all user data" to authorities and it would mean absolutely nothing for your privacy.
except they shared the IP address of an account even though they state "No personal information is required to create your secure email account. By default, we do not keep any IP logs which can be linked to your anonymous email account. Your privacy comes first." on their homepage
It's right there in your copy-paste my dude, "BY DEFAULT".
The jackass(es) who actually was at risk went the extra step to enable IP address logging, which means that when Proton had to comply with a lawful court order, they actually had data to give.
Proton is a company like any other that has to comply with laws in the country they operate in, but unlike a lot of other companies, they don't log data UNLESS YOU ASK THEM TO.
Moral of the story is, like has oft been repeated, know your threat model and plan appropriately.
If I understood correctly from Proton's privacy policy, VPN does not log IP addresses but at least in some circumstances Mail does. This is from their privacy policy:
Due to limitations of the SMTP protocol, we have access to the following email metadata: sender and recipient email addresses, the IP address incoming messages originated from, attachment name, message subject, and message sent and received times.
One thing must be remembered: Even Proton must follow the law and rules.
And those are the limitations created by the fact that email was never meant to be truly secure, not in the way we define and expect security and privacy nowadays at least.
What's nuts is that what made Anubis' author go down that path was Amazon Bot (I remember precisely because they are the bot that also blew up my logs and thus forced me to take action against LLM scrappers) and... a significant share of the Web is hosted on AWS. So... Amazon is actually probably MAKING money by scrapping, no matter how inefficiently. I already hated Amazon but this is even worst than I imagined. It's probably not by design, to be fair, but it's also probably not something they'll invest into "fixing" as it's making them money. What an absolute human centipede situation.
The hardest online privacy is not operating in a way that just links all your "private" activity because you logged in around enough places to link them together and at least one place somewhere can be linked to your real identity
No one is going to read 21 levels deep into a three day old slapfight.
lousyd
in reply to crankyrebel • • •lath
in reply to lousyd • • •oppy1984
in reply to lath • • •Draupnir
in reply to crankyrebel • • •Species8472
in reply to Draupnir • • •mrductape
in reply to crankyrebel • • •I remember that scene. If I remember, he broke the handcuffs shortly after, without any trouble at all.
But yes, the situation in America is very shortly and it just keeps getting worse and worse.
TheKingBombOmbKiller
in reply to mrductape • • •::: spoiler spoiler
he is put in a concentration camp, while being told that he isn't entitled to due process. Escaping is a lot harder than in Man of Steel.
:::
Zerush
in reply to mrductape • • •Bronstein_Tardigrade
in reply to crankyrebel • • •Zerush
in reply to crankyrebel • • •