renzev

Oh, damn, that was the joke!? Went right over my head lol

Does your distro use pipewire by any chance? That would explain the lack of issues.

Ah, yes, the notorious unfuck-audio.sh script. It's like a rite of passage for linux users.

Huh, TIL

~ $ /bin/true --help
Usage: /bin/true [ignored command line arguments]
  or:  /bin/true OPTION
Exit with a status code indicating success.

      --help        display this help and exit
      --version     output version information and exit

NOTE: your shell may have its own version of true, which usually supersedes
the version described here.  Please refer to your shell's documentation
for details about the options it supports.

GNU coreutils online help: <https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/>
Full documentation <https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/true>
or available locally via: info '(coreutils) true invocation'

I honestly don't know what I prefer more, the overengineered GNU true, or the true that shipped with some older system that was literally just an empty file with the executable bit set.

When I said that Microsoft has a lot to learn from Linux, Ubuntu Server is not what I had in mind 😂

Strange. I use windows 11 occasionally, and it's never even as much as mentioned onedrive to me. Could it be that it's a cracked install? Or that I never connected the local account to a microsoft account? Or that I'm in the EU?

Edit: Downvote? Really? Are you really that jealous that my windows experience is slightly less painful than yours!?

You're misrepresenting my argument. We both agree that dogs are not people and people are not dogs, and that having a specific opinion about dog breeds is different from having a specific opinion about race.

What I'm saying is that, even if you set aside questions of data reliability, there are dozens if not hundreds of ways to interpret the graph that everyone in this thread keeps posting. What if all dog breeds are equally aggressive, but only some are physically capable of killing a human? What if dog breeds that look more aggressive attract irresponsible owners that train them to be more aggressive and intentionally put them into dangerous situations around other humans? Of all the possible conclusions, that guy jumps to some breeds are just inherently more dangerous than others. This is the same logical leap that a racist follows when confronted with statistics about crime rate vs race.

And it's not just that. Notice their language. Their comment is phrased like a question rather than a statement, a pattern that not-so-pleasant people are notorious for (look up "JAQing off"). The EDIT uses classic catchphrases like "Use your brain, not your feeeelings!". This fits the verbiage of a modern internet racist to a tee.

Look, what I said about the alt twitter account was an exaggeration. Maybe the guy is genuinely not racist. But even if they are, why should I bother differentiating between a racist and someone whose arguments, language, and misuse of logic is functionally indistinguishable from those of a racist? The moment racism starts to enter the mainstream (due to a right-wing government or similar), I expect people like that to put up no resistance.

Are the tankies in the room with use right now?

Protip: when arguing online, a very good strategy for wasting other peoples' time and generally being an insufferable prick is to always pick a slightly unconventional definition of the topic that you're arguing about. It works even better if you shift your definition subtly throughout the course of the argument. That way, each individual statement you make is technically not false, while your overall "argument" is an inconsistent ill-defined undisprovable mess that's impossible to argue against.

If you actually read the post, she's not "blasting" her husband. She's seeing him be perfectly content without chasing all those markers of career success, and questioning why she cannot do the same. She's realising that she relies on external validation to feel happy, and that that's not a good thing.

Ah, a doas user, I see!