VS Achuthanandan, politician who pushed for Linux adoption in India, passed away today
India has one of the highest rates of (desktop) Linux usages in the world - hovering around 10% according to StatCounter. Why is this? One reason is concerns over software controlled by foreign countries - particularly the US and China. But another is cost.
The first major boost for Linux and other free software in India came in 2006, when VS Achuthanandan - who passed away today - was elected Chief Minister of the state of Kerala. His government came up with a policy to shift all government computers to free software, starting with schools and colleges.
When the financial benefits became apparent, other states and the Union government followed suit.
Microsoft Windows to be replaced by Maya OS amid rising cyber threats
Indian government agencies reportedly developed Ubuntu-based Maya OS for more than six months.Vinay Patel (International Business Times UK)
Reverse engineering the mysterious Up-Data Link Test Set from Apollo
cross-posted from: lemmy.bestiver.se/post/507866
Comments
Reverse engineering the mysterious Up-Data Link Test Set from Apollo
Back in 2021, a collector friend of ours was visiting a dusty warehouse in search of Apollo-era communications equipment. A box with NASA-st...www.righto.com
Interesting things happen when you don't placate the US empire 😁
like this
originalucifer likes this.
"Wait and respect" — Peskov's response to Russophobia in Azerbaijan
"Wait and respect" — Peskov's response to Russophobia in Azerbaijan: EADaily
EADaily, July 21st, 2025. It is important for Russia that Russians are respected in Azerbaijan, Russian Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, answering a question from journalists about the prospects for relations with Azerbaijan amid the confro…EADaily
The Russian army is moving to the Dnipropetrovsk region, there is panic in Kiev
The Russian army is moving to the Dnipropetrovsk region, there is panic in Kiev — summary: EADaily
EADaily, July 21st, 2025. The Russian Armed Forces are reaching the state border in the Dnipropetrovsk direction with a broad front.EADaily
EA daily is among laziest, most obvious russian propaganda channels. Full stop. Whatever you're getting paid to stink up this thread with your propganda, please for your sake, insist on hard foreign currency payments.
Your continuous stream of thread of "uS emPiRe FaiLliNg, rUzZiA $tRoNk!!" variants is admirable for dedication, but could use a little balance and subtlety if you expect actual humans to be influenced by them.
Instant aggressive whataboutism response from a two month old burner account that posts pro-russia slop several times a day! you're a moderatly well programmed bot.
Wailing about the 'empire's propaganda machine' while literally trumpeting Russian talking points with shameless aplomb. <chef's kiss>. Spectacular stuff.
That's okay. Your stream is a constant barrage of propaganda jumping from Kremlin-aligned and China friendly talking points, from "AOC IS A FRAUD", Israel is committing genocide, Zelensky is a fascist. Generalized complaints about Western propaganda, complaining about NATO expansion, celebrating Chinese achievements in high speed rail. Quick scan of your history, this one jumps out re: US sending weapons to Ukraine: "I don’t care. Whatever ends up weakening the US. I’m tired of it turning my region into a shooting range.".
Let's dissect this one for a second - the mental gymnastics to get around this are truly Olympic caliber - complaining about external forces turning your region into a shooting gallery, given that Russia and Iran have funded Hezbollah, Hamas, PLO, Assad's Syria, general terrorist activity and frequent direct military intervention for the last 75 years, and yet implying all blame rests with the U.S. and none with the corrosive, mischievous death cult of Russia and Iran - Spectactular stuff.
So - think whatever you want. It's cool - ths is social media, and you have picked your side, loud and clear. West Bad, Ukraine Bad. Got it. Yawn. Although if you are actually a human being, rather than a paid spammer or bot - it begs the question why you would waste your time picking fights on a Ukraine-sympathetic themed thread.
Especially given that admin’s treatment of various subsections of Russians.
Yessir, and that fact is based on evidence provided by:.....western.....empire controlled....sources....hmmmmmmm
LGBT movement tagged as extremist in Russia — Supreme Court
As the lawsuit pointed out, various extremism-related signs and manifestations, including incitement of social and religious discord, have been identified in the movement's activities in RussiaTASS
Russian Forces Press Multi-Front Offensive: Ukraine’s Defenses Stretched to Breaking Point
Russian Forces Press Multi-Front Offensive: Ukraine's Defenses Stretched to Breaking Point
Russian troops have intensified offensive operations along several key axes in Ukraine, making tactical advances while stretching Ukrainian defenses. ...Anonymous103 (South Front)
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
You know what causes more harm than Democrats? People not voting for them because they're not far enough to the left, and therefore moving the entire country to the right.
What teaches the Dems to move to the right is that those on the right actually get votes.
Correct. What caused the Democrats to move right over the last 40 years were the retirees who continuously voted for centrist conservatives in primaries. They’re the only ones who always show up, hence the <15% congressional primary attendance.
Mamdani got the NYC primary up to a record 30%. That’s all it takes for us the move the Overton Window back to the left.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Mamdani got the NYC primary up to a record 30%. and they are already moving to put the kibosh on him! PROGRESS!
Because the corporate Dems are scared when people actually show up to vote in the primary. That's why we need to keep doing it to replace the Democratic leadership.
Why are you trying so hard to keep people from doing that? Are you an idiot, or are you a troll and actually want things to stay as they are?
What kind of fucked up, Stockholm syndrome shit is this? Keep giving more money and more power to the organization that resents your participation in the process?
Jfc, and gringos think they can tell anyone else what a democracy is.
All they can do to him is withhold funding. He won the primary with a grassroots campaign. The part you really don’t understand is that short of voter suppression or ballot tampering, we control the election.
Do you eat fast food everyday because of advertising or do you choose to be self-informed and eat healthy? Do you blame Big Lettuce for not advertising salads enough?
like this
Maeve likes this.
All meaningful positive change in the US happened outside of the theatre piece of electoral politics. These include:
- Socialist armies like vietnam's bringing the US to heel ended the US draft.
- Large numbers of people protesting internally, brought the end of the vietnam war, rights for workers like the 8 hour day, women's rights, etc. The US has one of the bloodiest labor histories of any country, and unfortunately the US state did defeat it, but all of the gains for US workers come from this historical period of anti-capitalist organization.
US electoralism is a distracting theatre piece, where both sides act as capitalist puppets. All positive change comes in spite of that system, when ppl start organizing outside of it.
Because it accomplishes nothing. It's not good strategy to play a rigged game, where acheivements were only made when people refused to play it, and went around it.
You've given me no reason to play your rigged game.
Whenever I come across one of these lemmy.ml posts where this general topic of leftists shitting on western libs comes up, it always makes me curious.
I understand what y'all hate. I regularly hear what doesn't work (voting). But I never hear a concise, specific, tactical thing that I as an individual could do.
Sometimes I'll see very generic notes about how "nothing's ever going to change until a unified, violent, upheaval happens", but that's about the closest I've ever seen.
So please. Indulge me. I'm a US lefty lib. What should I be doing if I want to help leftist causes (pro-labor / break up corporations / etc).
Because I swear to gods. According to folks here:
- voting? Doesn't work
- donating? You'll never outspend
- grass roots whatever? They'll stomp you out
- acts of coordinated violence? We'd never say that explicitly
What then? I hate the current trajectory of my country and feel helpless to change anything with the tools I have at hand. Give me one practical thing I can do to help unfuck this mess.
(And to the FBI listening in. I'd never do anything illegal based on advice of Internet strangers. I just wanna hear them say, out loud, what I think they _really want to say_)
No, the DSA doesn't have a better strategy. PSL gets more done per member, and actually has the cohesion to get things done. PSL is at the forefront of the ongoing protests against Trump, Israel, etc right now.
Maybe if Red Star Caucus became the only caucus in the DSA, they'd finally develop the cohesion necessary to wield its size properly. It's certainly better to join an org than not, but if there's both a PSL chapter and DSA in your area, you'd be far better off with PSL.
PSL's primary advantage is that it's a revolutionary party that doesn't shy away from participating in elections. It isn't focused on electoralism as the only strategy. The Democrats are a party of capital, they cannot be truly taken over.
Typical all or nothing response. Let’s forget the 535 members of Congress have primaries every 2-4 years so we can complain that ‘it was either Fetterman or Dr. Oz’ when Fetterman beat three primary contenders, two of whom were progressive, in a primary that saw <9% turnout.
If you think abstaining is the solution, why has it only made things worse for the last 40 years?
like this
Maeve likes this.
Just because some of the things in western media about NK are lies doesn't mean that they are all lies and NK is actually a democracy or a good place to live.
Read their newspapers you will never see them talk badly about their leaders the way they talk about them is creepy and cult like.
If they were a free country they wouldn't try to stop their citizens from leaving.
If they were a democracy they wouldn't have hereditary leadership like a monarchy.
I'm not going to support a monarchy just because they call themselves socialist.
Tankies keep making the mistake of assuming just because something opposes the west that it is a good thing and that anything you've ever heard about it is all lies. You guys are just choosing your preferred countries propaganda over the western propaganda you just want to lick a different boot.
It’s entirely possible to be a communist while also believing that NK is a shitty country.
You have missed the point entirely, NK isnt a "shitty country" because that is just a false narrative put forth by the empire's massive media manipulation/propaganda anti-communist machine.
It's generally seen as a submissive act to do it to someone else. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, just like there's nothing inherently wrong with wanting to lick your partner's feet. However performing a submissive act of that nature on someone who doesn't deserve it is questionable and kinda sad.
Inb4 "ur homophobic"
A) I'm not taking an accusation like that from someone who's username is mathemachristian
B) I literally told my girlfriend the other day that when I visit her I'm going to suck her dick so hard she'll think she had bottom surgery. IDK what the fuck that was supposed to mean, but she liked it.
Edit: I've seen people try to set that trap before. It's a cheap way to "gotcha" someone and is usually used to try and accuse them of being homophobic (something about sucking dick being something only gay men do, which isn't even remotely true lol). I see people resort to stuff like that when they don't have anything of more substance. It also ignores that the potential that the user themselves is gay.
Yes.
Please.
Tell me how I, a transbian, am homophobic.
Edit 2: apparently people thought I was saying "you don't have to suck their dick just because they're questionably communist" was supposed to be an insult? No, it's not the act itself lmao. I've sucked cock and I've been told I'm very good at it, and that's not something I shy away from. Nor is there anything wrong with being a sub. I'm a really subby furry ffs. No, it's the idea that someone would suck an authoritarian's dick is what I find issue with. It's not the what, it's the who. Just like I'd be very concerned if you were sucking off Trump; however if you said you wanted to suck off some widely loved political figure or celebrity then I'd be all for it.
This clarification feels tedious but apparently necessary: a political attack made in public.
I wonder if you'd defend the f-slur as not being homophobic because some gay friends of mine might use it subversively. That is not in the context you were asked for an example.
You're wrong and your argument was so stupid that there's no defending it. That's why you're play acting a fool and avoiding the criticism of it.
If it's not homophobic to attack a politician being insufficiently bloodthirsty towards another country, why do you never see this attack deployed against women in the same way?
Answer or don't. But please fuck off if you don't.
It's generally seen as a submissive act to do it to someone else.
Yes we already know that societally it's employed as a homophobic and highly sexualized demeaning slur. Everything you wrote after is just apologizing for your use of it.
I just meant "quit pleasuring an authoritarian shithead".
Are you trying to tell me that you thought I was saying that sucking dick is inherently a bad thing? I'm a fucking furry. Are you actually serious right now? It's not the act, it's who you're doing it to, ffs.
What irks me about sexual insults is that they require sex to be seen as shameful in order to work. If you understand sex as nothing more than a personal matter between adults, without any ‘special’ significance, then the insult can only be annoying in an unintended way.
I understand that it is supposed to be a crude metaphor for getting a point across, but it is really lazy rhetoric and only feeds into Northern culture’s need to stigmatize sex as shameful or shocking.
performing a submissive act of that nature on someone who doesn’t deserve it is questionable and kinda sad.
Even if that were the case here, it would be nobody else’s business, just like Mossy Feathers’s sexual relations with her lover aren’t—or at least shouldn’t have been—any of our concern. This is exactly the sort of unsophisticated thinking that I would expect from somebody who uses sexual insults.
What irks me about sexual insults is that they require sex to be seen as shameful in order to work.
Spot-on. It requires sex to be negative. Those who use sexual insults often confuse destigmatizing sex in general with taking a sex-positive stance, just because you use sex in conversation doesn't get rid of the regressive overtones.
You know what it wouldn't have ended up as? What we have now.
What's the death toll at currently for innocent people?
I wish more of my fellow Americans understood this. There has yet to have been a usurper to Trump's power for a reason, and that reason is that every offered "replacement" for him has a shred of humanity, and humans are things that consider others' reactions because it has implications for their power.
Trump has no humanity, and no such consideration of others at all. There is Trump and only Trump, and the cruelty happens breathlessly. The effortless cruelty is what MAGA likes. Anyone who even so much as flinches in the face of the cruelty that his crowd craves means that the wolves will erupt in a frenzy and consume each other.
It has flamed out a couple dozen "contenders", and it will continue as long as Trump is alive (and, perhaps, as long as Don Jr is still alive).
It's not nonsense. It's human nature. People are, in general, not different than their tribal ancestors from 300,000 years ago.
The forces that create the environment for a Hitler to come to power are different than the personality cult that develops after the person is in power.
It’s human nature
When ever you see this, is guaranteed that whatever follows is baseless pseudoscience.
You setup the strawman that I claimed it was Great man theory.
I specifically stated it wasn't Great Man throry but you continue the strawman because you have no argument.
A cult leader isn't a Great Man as described by Carlyle.
You setup the strawman that I claimed it was Great man theory.
No, what I said is that it is Great Man Theory. And it is.
But I'm putting that all to the side, I want to see the sources for your scientific claims before anything else.
I specifically said the forces that result in a Hitler aren't the same as the cult that developed after the fact.
You want me to prove a negative.
As to the evolutionary basis of tribalism, I guess you don't know how to Google "evolutionary basis of tribalism" so here are some links:
sumananthromaterials.blogspot.…
australasianleadershipinstitut…
scholar.harvard.edu/files/henr…
Origins of Leadership From Tribal Chiefs to Ancient Rulers
You are now reading the first chapter of The Leadership Odyssey a book that explores the evolution of leadership through history8217s most iconic figures.The Australasian Leadership Institute
tribalism
Literally no one mentioned tribalism before this, please no Motte-and-Bailly arguments, I want to see the biology papers for the specific claim you made.
I did. You wanted me to prove that great man theory was evolutionary Tribalism which I not only didn't say but specifically refuted.
What the fuck is your problem? You aren't happy being right in an argument.
Withdraw what? You confused Tribal leadership with Great Man theory.
Prove that Tribal leadership has no evolutionary basis or withdraw your claim.
I said this:
"The forces that create the environment for a Hitler to come to power are different than the personality cult that develops after the person is in power."
Which is literally Herbert Spencer’s critique of Great Man theory!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ma…
I also claimed that tribalism has evolutionary roots. You need a source for that?
I also claimed that tribalism has evolutionary roots.
No, you didn't. You claimed that MAGA will die with trump because evolutionary biology. Source that claim
1st link is about 4 different types of tribe structures
2nd is about leadership and its relation to tribes
3rd link literally runs counter to your initial point about trump cults being a result of human nature, it actually fucking argues that a society is shaped by material conditions but without using the term "material conditions":
By the same logic, "Trump cultists", as you refer to them, do not stray far from your average liberal because it's also within the liberals' human nature to be apathetic towards brown kids, women and unarmed men across the planet to explode into pieces, not because trump supporters and liberals that don't like trump optics have a vested interest in maintaining status quo..
See how ridiculous that sounds?
Nobody fucking argues this way because human nature isn't something that's scientifically grounded, but rather it's a metaphysical expression of our being weaponized by libs like you.
If you're going to roleplay being an intellectual, at least do a better act of reading the stuff that you cite in relation to the points you make, otherwise @BrainInABox@lemmy.ml might bite 👻.
within the liberals' human nature to be apathetic towards brown kids,
People aren't robots made to exact specifications in a factory. There are both evolutionary and environmental factors that affect human behavior. Among a population there will be different genetics and different environments (which includes social factors).
The link you highlighted doesn't refute my position that Tribalism was created through evolutionary pressure. Your highlighted text supports the claim.
Your premise that people are wonderful caring humans is false. The majority voted for Trump. Explain it to me.
Don't weasel your way out and change the subject.
This is your position and this is what I was addressing:
Trump is a cult that dies with him.
This is your justification to that position:
It’s human nature. People are, in general, not different than their tribal ancestors from 300,000 years ago
You are suggesting that we as humans are hardwired to support the most popular individual and that anything eventful that happens is attributed to that one single individual (this is what Great Man Theory is), simply because as a result of evolution and somehow that's compared to tribes that lived 300,000 years ago, when hunting and gathering and grouping up was a necessity to ensure higher chances of survival. None of the links you provided back up that point, the hill you wish to die on, neither does your justification make any sense. I explained that these links only serve to describe and analyze tribes, not prove the Great Man Theory.
But you know what is a death cult?
Liberalism. And you're part of it, engaged in it, succumbed to it and running cheerleader for it, because it serves to benefit you, Trump, Biden, Bernie, Rubio, Team Blue, Team Red, the full works.
Human nature, again, is also not scientifically grounded. Any argument mentioning human nature necessitates an actual scientific study on human nature itself, lucky for you, there's no such a thing. Here's another video explaining why it's a thought-terminating cliche.
I don't take it you're a reading type because obviously you did not read any of the sources you linked, otherwise you'd know that none of these actually say anything about human nature in relation to cults or tribes or whatever, so watch these from start to finish, you'd stand to actually learn something, lib
- YouTube
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.www.youtube.com
You are suggesting that we as humans are hardwired to support the most popular individual and that anything eventful that happens is attributed to that one single individual
I did not suggest that and refuted it many times!
STOP STRAWMANING.
y position that Tribalism was created through evolutionary pressure.
That was not your position, stop lying
That’s like saying no one should have killed Hitler.
You replied:
"Pure Great Man nonsense."
It's a non sequitur!
I didn't even suggest that Trump was a leader who got to power because of his abilities.
I then said this for clarification:
The forces that create the environment for a Hitler to come to power are different than the personality cult that develops after the person is in power.
Which is literally Herbert Spencer's critique of Great Man theory!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ma…
Yet you keep arguing!
I'm not sure why you are trying so hard to deflect any criticism of Trump into a societal problem. Trump isn't blameless. He has agency.
What you said is:
Trump is a cult that dies with him.
And you justified it by claiming it's "evolutionary biology". Substantiate that claim.
Evolutionary basis of cults:
csuepress.columbusstate.edu/co…
Source that cults fail after their leader dies:
The People's Temple (Jonestown)
Heaven's Gate
The Branch Davidians
Children of God
Order of the Solar Temple
Aum Shinrikyo
Modern Cults that survived their leader's death:
Mormons and Scientology.
Those are literal cults, not cults of personality. Trump supporters aren't living with him in a compound, genius.
And that paper isn't about evolutionary biology anyway, stop just linking whatever and hoping no-one checks
Cults aren't defined by people living in a compound.
And that paper isn’t about evolutionary biology
The paper referenced evolutionary reasons for cults.
You threw out the term Great Man theory without even understanding it.
I've refuted every single argument with sources and you keep arguing.
I stated the fact with sources: Cults have an evolutionary basis
I stated the fact with sources: Cults tend to die when the leader dies.
You have nothing in reply.
I believe you push Great Man Theory into arguments even when it doesn't apply to absolve Trump of any responsibility.
You keep claiming bad faith when I addressed your arguments directly.
I think outing a Trump apologist is useful.
Evolutionary justification for cults:
csuepress.columbusstate.edu/cg…
Cults tend to die with their leaders. I've listed many of the cults that died in this thread. Cults surviving the death of their leader is the exception.
You seriously believe that wasn’t staged? That patsy’s second to his last thought was about how he’d spend all the money he was promised….
… his last thought was interrupted by the bullet passing through it.
HDR Video Playback Lands in Chromium on Wayland
HDR Video Playback Lands in Chromium on Wayland
Chromium adds Wayland color-management-v1 support, allowing HDR rendering on supported platforms with a default-enabled feature flag.Bobby Borisov (Linuxiac)
like this
adhocfungus e thisisbutaname like this.
Please, FOSS world, we need something like ChromeOS
I think at least part of the problem has been the built in expiry date, and the fact that so many off brand Chromebooks are absolute shit. They have tiny screens and low specs, and struggle with multiple web pages open.
I fancied one myself to take out and about, as I do most of my work on my PC, but they all seemed to have under 13 inch screens, and a five year shelf life. I like to research my family tree, so have a few tabs open, but the lack of memory would kill them and make it painful to do.
Is ChromeOS even that successful?
I think this probably makes sense from within your "bubble", that of being the sort of technical user that's on a Linux forum on the internet. Chromebooks are incredibly popular in education, and ChromeOS has held a marketshare of 5-8% over the last few years, only dipping to 2.5% in the last six months.
Linux already will run on a literal brick, we just need an OS that is web-first and locked down for high school kids in a way where educational institutions will want to buy it in bulk. As for device, we really need something built to be a modern netbook. The Framework 12 could have been that, but it starts at $1244 in fully base spec with an i3-1315U, no Windows license and DIY. What we need is a Framework 10 without expansion cards, without a digitiser/touch, running the barebones Intel N100 4c/4t, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD. Make it as repairable but single SKU and pre-built. Partner with someone like Universal Blue for the OS, who they already have as an official partner for other devices with Bazzite. It also needs to be sub-$600 to compete.
By the way, ChromeOS being folded into Android isn't a negative reflection on it. Google are trying to mimic Samsung DeX with their Pixel devices and it just isn't a smart business decision to develop two parallel desktop experiences when ChromeOS already runs on the Android kernel anyway. Android also has more brand recognition, and overall it will probably encourage developers to make proper desktop kb+m versions of their apps (which can exist in the same apk). A way for Linux to compete there would be strong system integration of Waydroid but that's probably mostly a "bonus feature" if they manage to succeed with everything else.
I read the article and it just sounds like they're praising ChromeOS for being web browser centric. Need office, open Google docs/drive. Pretty much a Linux distro but by default come with a bunch of progressive web apps installed for common applications?
Consumer expectations. On Linux you can just use the web browser just like most people already do on ChromeOS and I assume windows and mac's. But on regular Linux, Mac, and Windows people expect more. So I guess a distro that brands itself and markets to users to just use the web browser for everything and maybe a store of progressive web apps/preinstalled ones
Also out of the box support. ChromeOS is Google backed. Laptop makers sell mainstream ChromeOS boxes. Linux doesn't have major mainstream device support. It'd be far less fussy if hardware vendors were releasing plenty of Linux out the box hardware. Right now it's some workstation centric hardware from Lenovo and Dell and smaller companies like System76
On that note I'd place my hopes with System76 since they're currently focused on consumer experience. Cosmic DE is still not prime-time ready but maybe a couple more years. 26.04 release use as the default for their new hardware and it still effectively be early adopter phase for Cosmic DE. Then 28.04 ready for primetime. Keep trying to break into being a mainstream hardware brand. Other is what happens with KDE Plasma with Valve and SteamOS, Plasma Mobile, and maybe the TV interface. A bunch of consumer centric use cases driving development in KDE land. Maybe they'll come up with a way to get flatpak permissions work in a way that alerts users on need and makes it easy to do like on Android/iOS
Because arch btw 🙄
I think an immutable distro like Bazzite's cousins Aurora (KDE) and Bluefin (GNOME) would be far more appropriate. Combined with automatic rollback (if the system fails to boot, rollback to previous version) and it'd be practically bulletproof in education.
In reality, what Chromebooks provide is a reinvention of the good old mainframe and terminal principle. In theory (like my recent - half joking - 9front comment) this is something that would be really easy to set up with nearly all Linux systems and especially immutable ones.
My take would be:
Put an sign up / sign in form as a "first boot" message in a distribution of your choice where you can specify (or have pre-filled by an organisation) a central server (could be something fancy like Nextcloud or something simple rsync based) where your whole profile folder gets synced to. After that: If anything goes kaputt just roll back the sync. Or "powerwasch" (to keep the ChromeOS terminology) the system to a clean state and re-sync your home folder.
In theory something that could all be implemented with a little scripting in an afternoon.
The End of Windows 10 is looming. The world needs a simpler, easy, quick, snackable alternative
OpenBSD exists.
That said, this article remains true.
Personal Reflections On Immutable Linux
Immutable distributions are slowly spreading across the Linux world– but should you care? Are they hacker friendly? What does “immutable” mean, anyway? Immutable means “not …Hackaday
Is it difficult to break
Well, it won't forbid you rm -rf /. But generally, it is very reliable.
Is it easy to install software?
Yes, and there is quite a huge selection available from the official repositories (and you can compile most software "missing" there yourself).
Does it include support for a variety of hardware OOTB?
It depends on the hardware, but generally speaking, OpenBSD supports a nice amount of platforms and tries to keep "old" hardware alive as long as possible (for example, VAX support was dropped in 2016, which was quite some time after they were en vogue). What isn't supported, however, is Bluetooth which was removed in OpenBSD 5.6 unless you use a dongle.
you can compile most software "missing" there yourself
That's already very inappropriate for non-technical users.
What isn't supported, however, is Bluetooth
Also not appropriate. Bluetooth has been sold for decades now as an "it just works" solution to ad-hoc wireless peripherals like headphones and computer mice. Non-technical users need something that works OOTB with their existing devices.
That’s already very inappropriate for non-technical users.
There is no operating system in existence that provides every single software you could imagine as a precompiled package for your platform right out of the box.
Also not appropriate.
You do have a point here. I, personally, don't have a Bluetooth device at home, so YMMV, I guess.
like this
Mordikan likes this.
You're being downvoted, but you're right.
People want something simple. Something that just runs the basics and automatically backs up online and invisibly.
The vast majority of people don't need to have the choice of 17 different browsers, or 43 office suites, and they certainly don't need the terminal or Powershell, or anything else. They just need a browser and a way to maybe write a letter and view photos. Maybe a way for the kids to do their homework. If their laptop spontaneously combusts, they want to be able to sign into a new one and have everything put back as it was automatically.
ChromeOS is perfect for them, apart from being a Google product. It's something we tend to miss because we're technically minded, but most people don't care about computers, and don't want what we want. They want an appliance. If someone created that system with privacy built in, it could be great 😀
People have lives ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It's awesome that us tech-minded nerds can get under the hood, mess with it and customise to our preferences. We can then make it simple and easy for the folks that just need a computer.
If we want Linux to succeed more broadly, than it needs to be accessible to everyone.
We really should have a FirefoxOS equivalent. Frankly, there’s little reason not to do this. The only thing really missing is Firefox support for PWAs.
I’d imagine a Debian based OS, with cage first showing a first-time-setup thing, then going to simper web first DE. You still need a panel at the bottom for managing multiple windows and the system tray and wifi and a desktop and start menu for pinned apps. Storage doesn’t even need to be local, it could just point to something in the cloud that you have execute commands on your behalf.
This is the ideal for tons of simple, lightweight users and there are a LOT of them.
Windows isn't immutable either. And i had a lot of issues with Kinoite. Some flatpaks need workarounds, everything starts only after a second, can't really remove that one annoying software and too much rpm-ostree installs slows updates to a crawl, etc. Then you look into Universalblue's build-your-custom-image and see the bazillion steps and dependencies and walk away.
Now i look into plain old Fedora as a Windows 10 alternative for my mom.
Check out Blue Build for building custom Fedora Atomic images.
You create a GitHub repo using their helper website and use yaml.
They even have some useful modules specific to desktops (that would have been a huge pain to do in Dockerfiles)
The easiest way to build your own desktop Linux images.
The BlueBuild project creates accessible tools for you to create, configure & build custom images of atomic Fedora distributions.BlueBuild
Debian 13.0 Ready To Introduce Formal RISC-V Support (But Still Bound By Slow Hardware)
This is the first release where RISC-V 64-bit is officially supported by Debian Linux albeit with limited board support and the Debian RISC-V build process is handicapped by slow hardware.
Debian 13.0 Ready To Introduce Formal RISC-V Support But Still Bound By Slow Hardware
With the Debian 13.0 release planned for 9 August, one of the notable fundamental features with this Debian 'Trixie' release is now supporting RISC-V as an official CPU architecturewww.phoronix.com
like this
Mechanize e adhocfungus like this.
Debian 13.0 Ready To Introduce Formal RISC-V Support (But Still Bound By Slow Hardware)
This is the first release where RISC-V 64-bit is officially supported by Debian Linux albeit with limited board support and the Debian RISC-V build process is handicapped by slow hardware.
Debian 13.0 Ready To Introduce Formal RISC-V Support But Still Bound By Slow Hardware
With the Debian 13.0 release planned for 9 August, one of the notable fundamental features with this Debian 'Trixie' release is now supporting RISC-V as an official CPU architecturewww.phoronix.com
like this
Maeve e adhocfungus like this.
How Silicon Valley Monopolized the World (Tom Nicholas)
An interesting case study on how Uber affects smaller British cities, specifically Plymouth.
Tom has a very high-quality, low-volume channel that everyone should be subscribed to.
Gemini Is 'Strict and Punitive' While ChatGPT Is 'Catastrophically' Cooperative, Researchers Say
Gemini Is 'Strict and Punitive' While ChatGPT Is 'Catastrophically' Cooperative, Researchers Say
In tests involving the Prisoner's Dilemma, researchers found that Google’s Gemini is “strategically ruthless,” while OpenAI is collaborative to a “catastrophic” degree.Rosie Thomas (404 Media)
thisisbutaname likes this.
JavaScript broke the web (and called it progress) - Jono Alderson
JavaScript broke the web (and called it progress)
We replaced simple websites with complex apps nobody asked for. Now it takes a complex build pipeline just to change a headline.Aymen - Speetals.com (Meta)
like this
adhocfungus e thisisbutaname like this.
I disagree. flash popup ads were fucking horrendous.
that said, flash was poisonous. js is venomous.
I was referring to how it affected website development, not UX.
From my understanding of the article the author has noting against js, just how it affects the development process and architecture choices.
Oh yeah, it's totally JavaScript that's the reason that news and magazine websites suck. It's totally not the financial incentives of advertising that cause them to only care about the user experience so far as they get clicks. This totally wouldn't have been the exact same result if new media did everything on the backend and underfunded their backend dev teams. /S
Jesus Christ, why do these inane articles keep coming up? The authors have the reasoning skills of "when I look into the sun my eyes hurt, therefor the sun is bad".
geneva_convenience likes this.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
The right direction would obviously be socialism with public ownership of the means of production and an economy being directed towards meeting the needs of working majority as opposed to a handful of elites.
So communism.
Not that I dislike the idea in principle, it's just that it didn't work well.
That's correct communism is the end goal. Also, not sure what you could possibly mean that communism didn't work well. Everywhere it's been tried, it has lifted millions out of poverty and provided them with housing, education, food, and healthcare. Countries run by communist parties today are demonstrably doing a far better job providing for the working majority than their capitalist counterparts. The research on the subject is extensive and the results are beyond question.
Professor of Economic History, Robert C. Allen, concludes in his study without the 1917 revolution is directly responsible for rapid growth that made the achievements listed above possible: web.archive.org/web/2020011904…
Study demonstrating the steady increase in quality of life during the Soviet period (including under Stalin). Includes the fact that Soviet life expectancy grew faster than any other nation recorded at the time: jstor.org/stable/2672986?seq=1
A large study using world bank data analyzing the quality of life in Capitalist vs Socialist countries and finds overwhelmingly at similar levels of development with socialism bringing better quality of life: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/…
This study compared capitalist and socialist countries in measures of the physical quality of life (PQL), taking into account the level of economic development. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/243090…
This study shows that unprecedented mortality crisis struck Eastern Europe during the 1990s, causing around 7 million excess deaths. The first quantitative analysis of the association between deindustrialization and mortality in Eastern Europe. academic.oup.com/cje/advance-a…
Romania, the inustrialization of an agrarian economy under socialist planning documents1.worldbank.org/curat…
An exploration of China's mortality decline under Mao: A provincial analysis, 1950-80 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/254955…
not sure what you could possibly mean that communism didn’t work well
Authoritarianism, repression, slower innovation and progress compared to Capitalism, pick what you prefer.
Not even China or Russia are pure Communist anymore.
Authoritarianism and repression are not downsides of socialism. They are how the state (every state, especially capitalist ones) works. If you want the workers to do a revolution and simply stop having a state, you're welcome to try and fail.
And you just got linked a wide array of studies showing how much better innovation and progress is under socialism!
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
You're just regurgitating nonsense here.
The term authoritarianism is utterly meaningless because all governments rely on coercion to maintain their authority. The state is fundamentally an instrument that’s used by the ruling class to maintain its dominance. The whole notion that political systems can be neatly categorized into authoritarian or democratic binaries is deeply infantile.
The reality is that every government derives its authority from its monopoly on legal violence. The ability to enforce laws, suppress dissent, and maintain order is derived from control over police, military, and judicial systems. Whether a government is labelled authoritarian or democratic, the fundamental basis of its power lies here. Therefore, the only meaningful questions to ask are which class interests it represents, and to what extent can it be held accountable to them.
What ultimately matters is which class controls the institutions of state violence. In capitalist democracies, the government represent the interests of the economic elites who fund political campaigns, own media outlets, and control key industries. Western public lacks the mechanisms necessary to hold the government to account, and the ruling class is disconnected from the broader population. That’s precisely what’s driving political discontent all across western sphere today. Meanwhile, in so-called authoritarian regimes, the ruling party serves the working class as seen in countries like China, Cuba, or Vietnam. Hence why there is widespread public trust in these government and they enjoy broad support from the masses.
There's also zero evidence for the notion that there's less repression under capitalism than there is under socialism. The incarceration rate in the US is higher than in China, and it's even higher than it was in USSR under Stalin.
The claim that the rate of innovation is slower doesn't stand up to scrutiny either. USSR had plenty of technological and scientific firsts. China currently pushing ahead of the west technologically on many fronts.
Finally, the discussion isn't whether China has pure communism or not. It's whether the system in China produces better results than western ones. That is the case practically by any metric you choose. On the other hand, we can see the regression in quality of life for vast swaths of the population in Russia after capitalism being reinstated. Here we have a direct comparison showing that capitalism does in fact perform worse than socialism.
The term authoritarianism is utterly meaningless because all governments rely on coercion to maintain their authority.
I think that we can't agree on the very basic definitions here.
I wish you good luck. Bye!
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
You seem the most reasonable here, but I see a problem continuing this argument if we can't agree that there are fundamental differences between what is commonly intended as authoritarian government (let's say Russia, Turkey, Iran, China, ...) and the average western country.
It does not mean that western countries are perfect, nor that none shows sign of authoritarianism (Trump's US), nor that nothing should change, or anything of the things I never said in this thread.
You don’t have to run away from the conversation just because you have a different definition of authoritarianism.
Contrary to what you may believe, I replied to this thread to have some fun and a chat around what I find a terrible meme. What I learned is that I should simply avoid any interaction with anyone writing from hexbear since you guys approach politics in a very identitarian way which is something I find dull.
No offence intended, but continue without me. Bye!
The US, which has an incarceration rate roughly 5x that of China and the single largest prison population in the world, is notably absent from your authoritarian examples (other than blaming it on Trump of course lmao)
That's because the US is not an authoritarian regime: there can be regular elections, there is freedom of speech, separation of powers, etc. It's true that it's far from being perfect freedomhouse.org/country/unite…
Now please don't reply that it's a single-party state with two options. It's an old joke, it has some truth in it, but it's just a joke.
United States
See the Freedom in the World 2024 score and learn about democracy and freedom in United States.Freedom House
we can't agree that there are fundamental differences between what is commonly intended as authoritarian government (let's say Russia, Turkey, Iran, China, ...) and the average western country.
Yeah there's differences. In Western countries, a lot of wealthy white people can just chill while their governments enact tremendous violence against minorities to sustain their quality of life. In Russia, Turkey, Iran, China, and other peripheral or semiperipheral countries, the state has to deal with the contradictions head-on instead of exporting them elsewhere, so they have to be more repressive. That's a real difference, but it makes me think that the Western countries are worse than the "authoritarian governments" you list.
In fact, the way you choose Trump's US as the turning point that supposedly shows that authoritarianism just now appeared out of nowhere, shows how one-sided your view of history and politics is. Now the US turned authoritarian. Not when they were literally dousing Mexican immigrants in kerosene in 1916 or doing Jim Crow segregation that inspired the Nazis.
Mexicans were forced to take kerosene baths when crossing the border into the U.S. back in 1916 -
In 1916, the US began forcing Mexicans who crossed the border to bathe in kerosene and vinegar. Until the 1920s, crossing the southern border was notMDP Newsroom (Mexico Daily Post)
Don't put words that are not mine in my mouth.
Society is constantly evolving with huge differences even noticeable in a lifespan. It means that obviously 100+ years ago, something unacceptable for modern standards was the norm. It also means that it's ridiculous to bring up events of 100+ years ago to criticize the modern world.
To make an example: 80 years ago Europe was literally bombing Germany and Italy and their nazi-fascist regimes, but just a couple of decades later they were forming an alliance that eventually led to the EU. Even if today there are still nazi-fascist movements in the EU, and neo-fascist parties are even leading countries, one must be blinded by ideology to deny that there was an improvement. Improvement does not imply perfection.
Trump is a step back and I find his term horrifying. However, even in Trump's America, even with all the regressions in terms of civil rights, even with the changes to shift even more money towards billionaires, even with what ICE is doing, even with all of that, it remains a country where the vast majority lives a better life than in the large part of the present and past world. Failing to acknowledge that in the name of pure ideology is simply nonsensical. "US = authoritarian regime" or "they exploit the south" may have some truth in it, but it's such an extreme position to be unreasonable and, frankly, childish. It works only here, in a bubble in a corner of internet where everyone reinforce each other's ideas and violently reject any different opinion.
Why insist that the US being authoritarian and exploitative of the global South is an unreasonable position? The way I see it, you're just trying really hard to make this artificial separation between "authoritarian" countries that aren't even defined in any coherent way, and democratic Western countries. What is it about the US, with the highest prison population in the world, a rampant surveillance state, and police violence every single day that is better than a country like Iran?
In this comment you give the reason "it remains a country where the vast majority lives a better life than in the large part of the present and past world." I'm not going to deny that.^[Some people in my instance have been trying to argue against that point, but I honestly think that there's a contradiction many leftists are bad at confronting, where they simultaneously believe that capitalism is an absolute evil that has never done anything good for anyone except for the top 0.001%, but at the same time the reason people in the imperial core accept capitalism is because they benefit from capitalism?] But that has nothing to do with "authoritarianism." The US could be the wealthiest country in the world where 70% of the population lives much better lives than the vast majority of the rest of the world. That still wouldn't make the US a country that isn't authoritarian, so really when you attack countries like Iran or Turkey for being authoritarian but defend the US, you are using a double standard. If you're authoritarian and rich, that's fine, but authoritarian and poor is a cautionary tale?
Furthermore, in the case of Europe, you're failing to appreciate the long arc here. You're talking about the neo-fascist parties (I assume you mean parties like AfD and Orban's party in Hungary) as if they were uniquely the problem. But we can all plainly observe that the liberal, so-called "democratic" European parties have no problem at all committing genocide. They have no problem at all beating up protesters who call for an end to military aid to Israel. The ease with which they arrived at this position, of using violence to shut down popular support for ending genocide, should make you question whether one really has to be "blinded by ideology" to say that authoritarianism is just as present in Western "democratic" countries as it is in the developing world. Are you really confident that as climate change gets worse and worse, European "democracies" aren't going to go fascist and start putting climate refugees in concentration camps, instead of drowning them in the Mediterranean?
What is it about the US, with the highest prison population in the world, a rampant surveillance state, and police violence every single day that is better than a country like Iran?
You can’t be serious. Iran checks all the marks of a dictatorship: there is an unelected leader, it’s a theocracy, there’s full control on media, they arrest journalists and whoever opposes to leader, they repress the protests with violence…
I’m not a fan of the US, but it would be dishonest to put them on the same level.
there is an unelected leader, it's a theocracy
Women lost the right to abortions in the US very recently because the religious ghouls in the Supreme Court, who are all unelected leaders, decided against it. This is also the reason the US has extremely weak environmental protections, and many other problems that plague US politics.
there’s full control on media, they arrest journalists and whoever opposes to leader, they repress the protests with violence…
Other than full control of media, how does this not describe the US?
Edit: just to pre-empt the obvious counterargument that in the US you can oppose the government without being arrested: yes, you can, as long as you aren't speaking out in a dangerous way. The 6 Ferguson organizers who all died under mysterious circumstances should be evidence that if you do speak out in a way that the state deems unacceptable, they'll just kill you. Hopefully you can see how in Iran, not everyone who ever says anything against their government is jailed (we even have Hexbear users from Iran that have posted things that are critical of their government). The thing that would get you jailed is if you destabilize the country with your speech. Every single state in the world will have you jailed for destabilizing it, the only difference is how hard to destabilize each state is.
Deaths of six men tied to Ferguson protests alarm activists
Six deaths involving men with connections to protests in Ferguson, Missouri, have died and some wonder if something sinister is at play.Associated Press (NBC News)
The Supreme Court is appointed by the President and the Senate, both elected democratically. Also the Supreme Court is part of the Judiciary power which is rarely directly elected. Judges do not make the laws but can give binding interpretations of existing laws or sentences. I can agree with you that the Supreme Court may have a political bias, but it’s not supposed to be ideological.
There are reports about press freedom. It’s not 100% in the US, actually the score is quite low for a western country, but it’s not as bad as in authoritarian regimes.
The representatives that people can vote for are already selected for by the bourgeoisie. Both parties represent capital, not the worker. It's meant to give the impression of democratic input while maintaining the same brutal system of capitalism. Same with the press, it's only "free" so far as the wealthy can buy and use it however they like.
All states are authoritarian. What matters is which class is in control of the state, the proletariat, or the bourgeoisie. In the US, the imperialist bourgeoisie rule with an iron fist.
So every candidate of every party in every country is just a puppet of the capitalist overlords that rule the world and occasionally concede small victories to the blue collars to create the illusion that they are in charge. There is no way out through the system, because it’s all rigged.
Something like that?
Then I presume that you advocate for the proletarian revolution but are unable to carry it on because the majority of folks is too hypnotised to act.
For starters, there are several countries where the proletariat is in charge, like the PRC. It isn't every country that is under a dictatorship of capital. Secondly, there are worker parties like PSL in the US that aren't just the state arm of capital. All states are is the monopoly on force to be exerted to carry out the will of the ruling class, in capitalism these are going to inevitably be under the thumb of capital. The purpose of the state is to retain capitalism and crush opposition.
I do argue for revolution, yes, but "brainwashing" doesn't exist. There isn't this conspiracy-theory level hypnosis going on. Workers in the west share in the spoils of imperialism, as imperialism decays and disparity rises, radicalization increases. This pushes revolution to the forefront over time.
China is governed centrally by the party. It’s not the communist utopia that some left-wing imagine it is. Don’t get me wrong, they are achieving impressive results, but it’s also a regime. I know some Chinese who ran away, and their stories are horrible.
If you want my 2-cents, at least in the EU, very few care about the economic dimension of politics. Capitalism and Socialism are separated by a blurred line now, with the right and the left proposing very similar models. Nobody today would really like any of the two extremes. The battle, imho, is now more between progressivism and conservatism.
The PRC is indeed governed centrally by the CPC, the party of the proletariat. Nobody said China was a "utopia," you seem addicted to making strawman arguments. In fact, Marxism is anti-utopian, you continue to make arguments up in order to prove your baseless points. Also, "regime" just means "government you don't like," it isn't a physical thing. Some Chinese people don't like their system, but over 95% approve of their government.
The EU is thoroughly and entirely capitalist. There is no socialism in the EU. Capitalism is a mode of production characterized by private ownership of the large firms and key industries, while socialism is characterized primarily by public ownership of the large firms and key industries. The "right" and "left" that you speak of are only that way relative to each other, when overall they are both on the right. Further, the EU relies on imperialism in order to fund their safety nets. The fact that the EU has a relatively small left and a huge right does not improve your stance.
I really think you need to take a step back and familiarize yourself more with the arguments your opponents are making. You seem to only strawman, you don't actually know what us leftists want.
Imperialism - ProleWiki
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...ProleWiki
For a moment I had the impression that you wanted an open discussion, but you keep steering towards your dogmatic views which is interesting up to a point, and very annoying for the tone you use.
You should really learn how to make a basic conversation, or switch to unidirectional channels like writing a book or hosting a YouTube channel.
Have a nice day.
It’s since the very first reply in this thread that I’ve been accused of ignorance, of being a right wing fool, of using rhetoric expedients, of ignoring the success of the glorious China, of being an oppressor of the south, of being an idiot who defends a system that exploits him, and so on.
I’m not the one who didn’t try to engage genuinely.
Enjoy your bubble.
steering towards your dogmatic views
He didn't do anything wrong, though? You're the one that kept trying to hold China up against the standard of Utopia. You're the one that called China a "regime" (a meaningless term). You've been repeatedly leaving these comments in this thread, acting like you're gonna leave, but you continue to blather on with your liberal platitudes. If you could write just 1 or 2 substantial comments with good sources for every 5 "Bye!" that you write, maybe the conversation would have come to its natural conclusion by now.
unable to carry it on because the majority of folks is too hypnotised to act.
Where I am, the problem is not that people are too "hypnotised" or propagandized to act. The problem is that every time we have tried to establish our sovereignty the US has violently suppressed us.
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponce_ma…
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utuado_u…
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_… en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Lo…
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibert…
Most recently we had a massive protest movement that went absolutely nowhere because it wasn't organized with anything resembling a coherent leadership; if the various previous attempts at organizing the people hadn't been destroyed by the US or the colonial government, maybe it could've been productive.
Generally, our views on why revolutions haven't been successful are a lot more nuanced than "people are just too brainwashed." A lot of us believe that brainwashing itself is not real and it's just a concept that serves to obscure the real sociological phenomena that prevent class consciousness and revolution.
Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing”
I’ve become very skeptical of the concept of “brainwashing.” Over the past few months this skepticism has boiled over into open and explicit disagreement with even well-meaning pushers within the Marxist-Leninist corner.redsails.org
SCOTUS is democratic because the guy who was president 30 years ago got to make a lifetime appointment of a supreme court justice that makes decisions that affect people who weren't even alive when they were appointed? You have an extremely low bar for what counts as "democratic." If your standards are that low, you could even argue that because most people in Iran are Twelver Shia and the Ayatollah is the leader of Twelver Shiism, that's democracy.
Again, every single state will prosecute destabilizing behavior. Press freedom is gonna be better in wealthy western countries because a few bad news stories don't destabilize the country the way they do in the developing world. As I pointed out, the way the US reacted to events that actually do have the potential to destabilize the country shows that it is exactly the same as the so-called "authoritarian regimes" and this is also true of liberal European countries.
Lol: "there's no point having this discussion if you're not going to agree I'm right!"
Why are liberals such massive cowards?
Here we go!
You're typing this comment in the Year of our Lord 2025. Currently, China is becoming the world's main economic superpower as the United States squanders its imperialist hegemony. Cuba has the most successful healthcare system in Latin America, while everyone else in LatAm is either moving in the direction of socialism, or failing.
The time to make these embarrassing arguments was a century and a half ago, when the only examples of socialism were failed experiments like the Paris Commune. Hell, these days we can even point to how socialism's failures, like the later years of the Soviet Union, were still better than what came after, in the form of neoliberalism.
So either you've gotten to this point in the conversation because you're trolling, or you're really this ignorant and get all the information about the world around you from the New York Times and white boy youtubers.
China is no more a pure Communist country and Cuba may have a good healthcare system, but sorry if I stick to my capitalistic Europe.
I guess we will stick to our own opinions. Bye!
What do you mean by "pure communist country"? You don't know what the words you're using mean. Communism is not a system that can exist within one country, it's a state of the entire globe not having classes, states, or borders. "Communist country" is an oxymoron unless you mean "country ruled by a Communist party" which China objectively is.
China is a socialist market economy. The majority of the economy is under the state's control, and the public has democratic control over the state, so they are free to chart their own path and decide where their economy is headed. In contrast, under capitalism, if the market decides that building more housing and providing healthcare is not profitable, the people must just accept it. See the difference?
Cuba may have a good healthcare system, but sorry if I stick to my capitalistic Europe.
I don't know where in Europe you live, but chances are, conditions in your country are only acceptable because Europe built its wealth by exploiting countries like Cuba. Cuba taking its destiny into its own hands and improving conditions for their people should be applauded, not treated like it's insignificant.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
but sorry if I stick to my capitalistic Europe.
Exploiting the global south good job lib.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
What's the problem with my example? Roman Empire qualifies for "recorded history".
If you weren't a shit lib jabroni intent on knee jerk defending a system that does literally nothing for you unless you own capital, so smug and self assured and addicted to the smell of your own farts, you'd realize the point of the "recorded history" statement isn't "the systems used before were better"
the point of the statement is to illustrate how fleeting and ephemeral the supposed "only system that works" is. It has literally only existed for ~300 years, but stupid fuckers like you act like capitalist wage labor and property relations are just common sense "human nature"
Anyway, hope you're thrown into a pit you dumb fucker
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
No one is currently being starved to death (or otherwise being deprived of being alive) because of capitalism
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
in the medieval age when everyone was starving?
Mao has a great quote about how if you don't investigate something, you have no right to speak. Basically "shut up you stupid fucker" and statements like this are what it was for.
if "everyone was starving" how did humanity survive you dumb fucker
jason hickel talks a lot about actual medieval living standards if you'd ever like to be less of an ignorant dipshit
jason hickel talks a lot about actual medieval living standards
tell him to fix the Wikipedia then en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fa…
Liberals really do think Wikipedia is The Holy Scripture
So you agree with Elon?
That's ironic.
The Middle Ages were a long period with a lot of variety
omg just shut the fuck up you clearly don't know what you're talking about
It's always so crazy how people can get ego trapped in the most pointless internet arguments. Like you aren't saying anything! Just trying to wiggle your way through this when you could just walk away from the computer and do anything else.
The Middle Ages were a long period with a lot of varietyomg just shut the fuck up you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about
Sure, if you say so.
No one is currently being starved to death (or otherwise being deprived of being alive) because of capitalismAre you saying that since now only part of the world is starving, it was better in the medieval age when everyone was starving?
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?t…
Also, the nobility & clergy weren’t starving during feudalism, only the peasants during famines.
Not sure what point you're even trying to make here. Life expectancy has been improving due to science and technology improving.
You could starve to death because your crop had been taken by the lords or die hanged to a tree because you complained
That's literally how things work today where western corps exploit the workers in the global south. That's what your lifestyle in the west is built on. Go read up on the coups, death squads, and other atrocities the west regularly commits around the world to keep the system of exploitation going. Here's a good primer for you archive.org/details/KillingHop…
Wow, how convenient: "it wasn't a perfect utopia so you're not allowed to blame capitalism for it".
A reasoning as perfectly smooth and circular as your brain
Yeah, the classical mode of production was worse than what we have today. Slavery was worse than feudalism. Feudalism was worse than capitalism. Objectively speaking, for almost all of humanity, capitalism has brought about massive improvements in many aspects of life compared to previous modes of production^[Mind you, this does depend on when you start counting for much of the colonized world; I'm not counting the period of primitive accumulation under colonialism as capitalism, despite the fact that capitalism couldn't have come to, say, Latin America, without the Spanish and Portuguese colonial period having accumulated capital in the hands of the future bourgeoisie. A similar point also applies to Asia and Africa].
The point isn't that capitalism is uniquely bad. When it's not crashing and burning, capitalism is very good at creating wealth. The problem is that liberals today often assume that because capitalism is better than the systems that came before it, it means it is the best possible system, and will never be replaced. We know, due to the contradictions at the foundation of capitalism, that it inevitably will destroy itself.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
why are people pointing out the material reality of capitalism destroying the planet, don't they know that is just the nature of things? Only idiots use memes to blame systems of oppression for the suffering of billions.
Who are you, Schopenhauer?
If each new mode of production is measurably better than the last (otherwise, why even bother making the negative comparison from capitalism to Rome as you did?), why are you acting like it's meaningless for humanity to surpass capitalism? Do you really think it's all the same or is it different?
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
capitalism couldn't have come to, say, Latin America, without the Spanish and Portuguese colonial period
Oh come on we all KNOW that the Inca would have created industrial socialism by like 1750 if it wasn't for the damn Spanish
Maybe that's what you were getting at
It's sort of a niche history meme that the Inca could have made a kind of socialist state if they had more time. The idea goes back to a book from the 1930s
OP doesn't say that an older system was better - especially not some super-specific one. Just that it's NOT the only possible system and likely not the best there can be.
So I'm not sure who exactly you're arguing with.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
granitic opinionall my opponents have very solid understanding of history and political economy, and that's so unfair to me full of propaganda and vibes
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Correlation != Causation
As others have pointed out we have better lives today because of scientific and technological progress not because of capitalism.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
I fail to see what any of this has to do with an economic system. These are scientific or legal topics.
And indeed, slavery is present under unchecked capitalism as well.
The greatest measurable increase in life expectancy and quality of life happened in China during the second half of the 20th century, during which it developed from backwater feudalism to centrally planned socialism.
The greatest measurable reduction in life expectancy and quality of life occured in former Soviet countries in the 1990s, where they devolved from centrally planned socialism to internationally financed capitalism.
It’s not what the meme says, nor the apparent general opinion here.
The meme says that Capitalism did not exists for 99% of history (save for the fact that apparently UK was a capitalistic society in 1500s according to some) and that the world was better without it, failing to acknowledge that besides the many defects, Capitalism also brought prosperity to a large portion of humanity (which according to some here is a bad thing since exploitations still exist somewhere), and that it was partially adopted also in ex Communist countries.
Oh, and apparently any western country is an Authoritarian regime, and China is the best country for the improvement of life quality (no mentions for dissidents, but the US is surely much worse).
This is basically the summary of the whole thread. I haven’t heard so much ideology since the high school.
No, you're the only one here that doesn't realize that OP is advocating for socialism. This is a meme attacking capitalist realism, not stating that feudalism was better. You're in the fringe minority with that misinterpretation.
The west is authoritarian in that capitalists have full control, yes, and the PRC is making tremendous strides thanks to socialism.
How many times are you going to say “bye” before you actually fuck off?Mate, you’re the one running away because you can’t deal with people having different beliefs to you
pick one
"...including being crucified, eaten by lions in a public show, and being sewn alive inside a bag with various animals and thrown in the river to drown."
We've barely evolved at all. I just heard the President of the US relishing the idea of escapees from his concentration camp being eaten by alligators.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
I mean, tbf Feudalism and Capitalism isn't all that different from one another. The only difference is that Feudalism has the hierarchy embedded into government via the monarchy whilst Capitalism's hierarchy is enforced by corporations controlled by a different select few people.
Whether Socialism actually does replace Capitalism we have yet to see, I'd definitely prefer it over Capitalism.
Usually the way Marxists analyze the difference between systems like Feudalism and Capitalism, the focus is on how production is carried out, and what kinds of property exist. Under capitalism, generally, industrial capitalists who own private factories transform money into commodities (capital and labor, where labor imparts its value on the capital) which are sold back for more money than the capitalist paid (the surplus coming from labor, which isn't fully compensated). Feudalism is characterized because instead of the principal mode of production being industrial, it's agrarian and relies on serfs working on their lord's land for some period of time, then being allowed to work on their own lands.
The fact that the structure of who owns what kind of property is different is very important. In a lot of ways, this change in how production is carried out (what is called the material base) is more relevant in deciding the direction society is headed than how the government is organized (society's superstructure). The superstructure is shaped by the social relations in the base, but it can only maintain the base.
Motherfucker, people were already commenting on how ACTUAL labor relations for LITERAL SERFS weren't ACTUALLY as bad as wage labor (a form of slavery if you're not too brainwashed to realize what it means to have to work for a wage TO SURVIVE) in the motherfuckong 1800s
This isn't the own you think it is, it's just an admission of your vast and all encompassing ignorance
We cry shame on the feudal baron who forbade the peasant to turn a clod of earth unless he surrendered to his lord a fourth of his crop. We called those barbarous times. But if the forms have changed, the relations have remained the same, and the worker is forced, under the name of free contract, to accept feudal obligations. For, turn where he will, he can find no better conditions. Everything has become private property, and he must accept, or die or hunger.The result of this state of things is that all our production tends in a wrong direction. Enterprise takes no thought for the needs of the community. Its only aim is to increase the gains of the speculator. Hence the constant fluctuations of trade, the periodical industrial crises, each of which throws scores of thousands of workers on the streets.
Pyotr Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread
Let me tl;dr that for you: literal fucking peasants would give up a quarter of their crop, and this was seen as barbarous. The wage laborer GIVES UP THE ENTIRETY OF THE PRODUCT OF HIS LABOR. In exchange, he recieves A FRACTION OF ITS VALUE IN WAGE. The relative exploitation here is obscene, and yet people like you, ignorant, think it's some sort of voluntary contract that benefits us all.
But the wage laborer only "chooses" to work because they'll starve in the streets otherwise. The employer only has the privilege of benefiting from their work by owning the means by which they can do profitable work. They EXPLOIT THE WORKERS' SURVIVAL NEEDS and in doing so reap shares of profit from their labor that would make the cruelest medieval lord envious.
And now, you dumb motherfuckers sit here, reading all this, and think, oh, so you want to return to feudalism? like that in any way makes sense
How about ending the exploitation of labor entirely? That's what socialism seeks to do. But you dumb motherfuckers are out here acting like your fucking landlords do you any favors (while somehow pretending to yourselves they're any different from the evil feudal lords capitalism supposedly saved you from)
Let me tl;dr that for you: literal fucking peasants would give up a quarter of their crop, and this was seen as barbarous. The wage laborer GIVES UP THE ENTIRETY OF THE PRODUCT OF HIS LABOR. In exchange, he recieves A FRACTION OF ITS VALUE IN WAGE. The relative exploitation here is obscene, and yet people like you, ignorant, think it's some sort of voluntary contract that benefits us all.
Beautiful.
Why are you assuming I'm pro-capitalism? It was joke (thus the /j) because I found the framing of OP's argument strange because (at least to me) it seemed more like an argument for fuedalism than socialism.
I do now realize that I am incorrect with my initial assumption and thus I get why my joke wasn't very well received. I probably shouldn't have made it. Though I am confused as to why you made so many assumptions about my beliefs just from a dumb joke I probably shouldn't have made. If anything, I'm more anti-capitalism than pro-capitalism.
like this
100_kg_90_de_belin likes this.
capitalism began when the universe did, because chemicals trade electrons
Type of shit they'd say in Starship Troopers
For the people who are dunking on this by saying that historically things have been fucked up:
I think the point of the tweet is that systemic development doesn't stop at capitalism.
I'm pretty sure lots of educated people during the feudal era were saying that it was the best system available and at least they were dying less often than the Romans.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
People in this thread: BUT WHAT ABOUT LIFE EXPECTANCY?!?!
Bro you really want to argue life expectancy in favour of the ideology that argues whether curing a patient is makes business sense?
Your long life expectancy is thanks to science, which has existed for a far greater percentage of human history. To argue it's because of capitalism is dumb as hell.
Also life expectancy took a nosedive when the Soviet Union fell. Wonder why.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'
Goldman Sachs warns sales from the most successful disease treatments are difficult to maintain.Tae Kim (CNBC)
People in this thread: BUT WHAT ABOUT LIFE EXPECTANCY?!?!Bro you really want to argue life expectancy in favour of the ideology that argues whether curing a patient is makes business sense?
Your long life expectancy is thanks to science, which has existed for a far greater percentage of human history. To argue it's because of capitalism is dumb as hell.
We're also literally watching it nosedive in the west and skyrocket in china but unfortunately the west is full of morons such as the one in this very thread who think that "everyone starved in medieval times" and that capitalism somehow liberated us from it
hey wait, let's ask John Steinbeck how capitalism ACTUALLY TREATS AFFECTS FOOD SECURITY
The works of the roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price, and this is the saddest, bitterest thing of all. Carloads of oranges dumped on the ground. The people came for miles to take the fruit, but this could not be. How would they buy oranges at twenty cents a dozen if they could drive out and pick them up? And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth.There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must fill in the certificate- died of malnutrition- because the food must rot, must be forced to rot. The people come with nets to fish for potatoes in the river, and the guards hold them back; they come in rattling cars to get the dumped oranges, but the kerosene is sprayed. And they stand still and watch the potatoes float by, listen to the screaming pigs being killed in a ditch and covered with quick-lime, watch the mountains of oranges slop down to a putrefying ooze; and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.
huh
Bit chat is a peer-to-peer messaging app designed to operate over Bluetooth Low Energy mesh networks
permissionlesstech
permissionlesstech has 2 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.GitHub
like this
adhocfungus e thisisbutaname like this.
Two UK pro-Palestine organisations have bank accounts frozen
Two UK pro-Palestine organisations have bank accounts frozen
Groups say having access to funds cut off raise fears of wider attempt to silence voices speaking out about GazaHaroon Siddique (The Guardian)
How AI, robotics and late artist Morrisseau are helping fight art fraud
How AI, robotics and late artist Morrisseau are helping fight art fraud - Canada News Beep
Famed Indigenous artist Norval Morrisseau was browsing a Vancouver gallery with his longtime friend Cory Dingle around 1993 when a painting stopped them inNEWSBEEP (Canada News Beep)
CerebraAI App Review: 7 Unbelievable Ways It Beats ChatGPT in 2025
How force HTTP/2 ?
Hi,
I'm using FreeNginx and in my configuration i have
http2 on;but when I make a vist on http://localhost/ it's http/1.1 that kick...
I've found1
Firefox already has HTTP/2 AFAIK.\
The entry is called network.http.spdy.enabled.http2 but it's set to "false" by default,
I don't have this in LibreWolf, I created it, to see if it does something, but it's still the HTTP/1.1 that is used.. Any ideas ?
Thanks.
Thanks @Malix@sopuli.xyz,
Actually, no HTTP/2 do not require SSL/TLS!
Although the standard itself does not require usage of encryption,[46] all major client implementations (Firefox,[47] Chrome, Safari, Opera, IE, Edge) have stated that they will only support HTTP/2 over TLS\
~source:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/2#E…
it's Mozilla etc.. that force it !
WebPages hosted on the TOR Network (for example) do not need SSL/TLS certificates ! so what we can't have the benefit of HTTP/2 WTF
To the developers of LibreWolf, can you solve this limitation ?
geneva_convenience likes this.
geneva_convenience likes this.
geneva_convenience likes this.
geneva_convenience doesn't like this.
“Gator Grift”: Hundreds Caged in Inhumane Conditions with No Due Process at Florida Immigrant Jail
“Gator Grift”: Hundreds Caged in Inhumane Conditions with No Due Process at Florida Immigrant Jail
Florida Democratic Congressmember Maxwell Frost joins us to discuss how he observed horrific conditions in Florida’s new immigration detention jail in the Everglades, known as “Alligator Alcatraz,” when he joined other lawmakers in a visit.Democracy Now!
TrippyFocus
in reply to ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ • • •like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.