amazing. it looks like a nuclear meltdown

fake. he would boast about folding like nobody has ever folded before

to be fair, I understand the frustration and i myself hate linux sometimes too. i just wish they’d communicate they’re asking for help

i’m not going to extend this discussion further (nothing personal), but i want to say this:

you say the definition of totalitarianism is straightforward and unambiguous, but definitions don’t exist in a vacuum. even the most seemingly self-evident definitions have a reasoning behind them. and my problem with totalitarianism (and likely the other guy’s problem as well) is that it is an inherently anti-communist definition. we already have a term for oppressive regimes that control the roles and behavior of their citizens tightly with a rigid hierarchy: fascism. but fascism is fundamentally right-wing, so liberals can’t use this to vilify socialist regimes (and trying to make up bullshit like “left fascism” would make them look like idiots). totalitarianism, as a concept, solves this problem for them: it conveniently abstracts two policitally opposite kinds of regimes into a single category. then liberals can use it to defend capitalist “democracy” from its left-wing enemy, socialism, and its pretend enemy, fascism.

my mind immediately went to the ussr because that’s exactly what the idea of totalitarianism was made for. i’ll say it again: it creates a false equivalence between the fascist regimes that terrorized europe in the 20th century and the socialist regimes (the ussr, china, cuba, vietnam, etc) that represented a massive threat to capitalism. it’s an attempt to extend the fear of fascism to successful socialist regimes

i checked your profile and it looks like you’re an anarchist. i’m not gonna argue for or against that, but it’s pretty well stablished among communists that totalitarianism is an anti-communist concept, so it shouldn’t surprise you that we wouldn’t receive it well. it makes you sound like a liberal from the usa, to be completely honest, which is why i immediately replied that you’re not a leftist. regardless of how you feel about socialist regimes, maybe consider not using liberal concepts crafted specifically to attack socialism or at least understand why we don’t like them

peace

you’re still not addressing any of the criticisms

glad to help

main ssd with debian stable: a single partition for the system + swap

secondary harddrive: an opensuse, a debian testing, and a freebsd partition + shared data partition

no

as a leftist

you’re not a leftist

also, you spent most of your words defending your right to defend your political stance and didn’t actually argue back much against the criticisms the other guy brought up, such as

• totalitarianism was invented by a nazi
• it creates a false equivalence between communism and fascism
• it enables fascism to get off the hook (so many fascists deflect criticism by asking why communism isn’t criminalized as well)

debian bc i want a rock solid system that i don’t have to worry about maintaining and i don’t give a fuck about the most recent versions of stuff

to the unavoidable “it’s been 15 years” comments: 15-year-old x11 was a piece of shit. the difference is that we had no alternative so we had to put up with it

update: it seems someone is mad at matrix’s ceo for some reason and wants him to step down. this is the username of the last throwaway account that did this on matrix:

on matrix, they @ everyone in the room so as much people as possible see the content. it happened on some foss-related rooms i’m in (like emacs, debian, and kde). over here, i saw it appearing in a kde community

i’d usually agree, but in this case, it feels like a cost-cutting measure. webdevs are cheaper and more available, so it’s cheaper for them to just rewrite the installer in electron than pay more expensive desktop developers to maintain their existing installer

seems like yet another electron app that only runs locally. i’m guessing that hiring traditional desktop ui developers is getting harder and more expensive over time, so they don’t bother anymore and just hire webdevs instead

in today’s round of “lib or anarkiddie”…

(anyway, not sure what the comic has to do with the meme unless you think it’s criticizing marxism)

thanks for the tip about src/* skipping hidden files. i fixed that, excluded unnecessary massive files i found through baobab and copied the remaning files. everything worked and i’m now runnning debian testing

rsync has a ton of options. any specific setup you’d recommend me?

EDIT: seems like rsync -av src/* dst is working for me

they’re honorary white… until it’s no longer convenient then they’ll be just slavs again

you (and everyone else who thinks the gpl is just about contributing back) are missing the point. the main goal of the gpl licenses (including the lgpl) is user freedom. they ensure that you can modify any piece of gpl software anywhere it’s used. if you use a propietary system that includes gpl/lgpl software, you should be able to modify the gpl parts to do whatever you want. say for some reason you’re using a system that includes ai slop in its shell, but the shell is a gpl application. you could just grab a fork of the shell stripped of ai functionality and replace the system’s shell with it

that’s impossible with permissive licenses. with permissive licenses, you could be using a system with 80% open source software and be completely unaware of it, unable to change it as you see fit. from the pov of the user, “permissive” licenses are restrictive; copyleft licenses are freer bc its restrictions are there to forbid the developer from locking down free software for the users

of course companies are going to prefer permissive licenses. they want to take advantage of using free labor enable by open source while keeping the freedom to lock down said open source software in their systems. so, when given the option, they will always prefer to contribute back to software with permissive licenses

and that’s the whole problem here: you giving them the option by creating a copyfree alternative to an important piece of copyleft software. do you think companies would ever comtribute to linux if any bsd was a viable alternative to linux? but the kernel community at large decided to stick to the gpl, so the companies have no choice

it’s true that copyfree software isn’t any less free than copyleft software, and i’m not even completely against using permissive licenses. my issue is creating an mit alternative to gpl software