“aren’t as many of them”
I do not believe that. There is more of everything now than there was Internet before. The web used to be tiny.
You are not going to find what you want by clicking on the “Mozilla Cool Site of the Day”. But they are out there.
Not that I do not agree with the point the OP is making. The “cool site” story itself illustrates the overall story-arc of the Internet pretty well:
First, I love this.
To be fair to the original poster though, he did not do the “GNU / Linux” thing. His point seems to be that “Linux” is not enough information to know much about the graphics stack and that seems fair since there is Wayland / Xorg and an array of DE, WM, and toolkit options.
Have you tried Chimera Linux? It does not even use GCC. It is even less “GNU” than Alpine but no less “Linux” and I do not mean just the kernel.
That teapot is orbiting somewhere. I have no idea if my universe is the one.
Saying that you “know” there is no God is an extraordinary claim. Do you demand extraordinary evidence from people that make that claim? Or do you only demand it from people following a philosophy that requires them to believe independent of evidence?
Honestly, this is about as smart as religious people demanding miracles before they will believe in Science.
It is just as easy to point to the ideas of the extreme members of the “new atheist” movement as evidence that they are a dangerous cult.
Using the Southern Baptist Church as your example of religion is not a very good argument. Implying that atheists are somehow more rational as a group is not really a great argument either.
By the way, I am an atheist. I do no consider my beliefs to be unassailable scientific conclusions though. I recognize that many of my beliefs and preferences lack the robust rational foundation I would like them to. I doubt I am the pinnacle of morality or ethics ( more than doubt - but I am not looking to trash my own reputation here ).
Voting against your own interests or scapegoating others for what you see as damage against yourself or even just plain old hate do not require religion. Humans have lots of ways at arriving at those and being manipulated into them.
I agree with you. Using religion to manipulate people for political reasons is not really a religion problem. If you eradicate religion, there are many other levers to pull. In fact, manipulating religious groups these days also requires using these other weaknesses against people and then convincing them to ignore the conflict with their religious teachings.
Let’s say we agree.
Do you find this post more scientific or more religious?
Because I will agree with you if we can agree that the position being taken here is driven by treating science as a religion ( one they poorly understand ).
Spoken like a scientist. I doubt that is the answer they were looking for.
In my view, there are two components to “religion”.
1 - it typically starts with an attempt to explain why and how things are
2 - it becomes a human administration - this becomes more about politics than “religion”
Most of the problems with religion stem from the second part. I see the politics as the far bigger problem there. So people that want to create political movements around “science” are absolutely no better in my view.
If you read the question being asked in this thread critically, do you find it a scientific question? A political one?
I am not even remotely religious. But I take science pretty seriously.
Please tell me, scientifically, why you are so sure that people of faith are wrong?
There is some decent science that prayer does not work. I am not aware of anything offers anything at all testable concerning God.
And if we are simply pushing our preferences on others, I think a more important question is what makes people that claim to be evidence driven to adopt such strong opinions on things ( without evidence ) that they feel comfortable publicly slamming the preferences and values of others ( again with no evidence at all ).
As a science fan, you can say that absence of evidence means you do not have to believe. Correct. You cannot say that an absence of evidence proves your guess correct such that you can treat people who believe otherwise as stupid. Incorrect.
And “they have to show me the evidence” is a moronic stance. As a fan of the scientific method, evidence is YOUR burden of proof. For people that adhere to a religion, their standard is FAITH. So, they are holding up their end and you are dropping the ball. So what gives you the right to be the abuser?
So, I guess my answer to “why do people believe in religion would be”, “well, people still have faith and tradition and science has not produced any evidence that credibly calls that into question”.
Why are people not arriving at this conclusion on their own in 2024? Why have we failed so badly to explain the scientific method that people can still make wild pronouncements like this one.
I don’t like religion because it makes people easy to manipulate. People that treat science like a religion exhibit the same problems. I am not a fan of that.
Not that meant of us obviously.
Enough that it has really helped Lemmy. Too few to materially impact Reddit.
Type got a big overhaul in 1.3 as well, including fitting to paths.
Honestly I would be surprised if the compatibility of Office 2007 with modern Office is actually better than Only Office or even LibreOffice these days. Perhaps Open Office is still worse.
I am a big fan of LibreOffice in general and there is not much I need that I cannot do. That said, I agree that Calc has lots of little usability paper cuts like the one you describe that make using Excel a lot more pleasant.
Decent list though I actually prefer Jellyfin to Plex.
I don’t get Steam really. I guess it could be Open Source but the whole concept is essentially commercial by definition. It is an App Store for games.
Totally valid to add Windows if it is the only things that runs the other programs you need. Photoshop is one of the few mainstream apps that has no true competitor on Linux.
Funny. That is why I do not use Windows. It takes so long to set up. First, so many of the drivers are not built in. Then, hardly any of the apps I need are built in. Then, none of the programs stay current without constant admin.
Who has that kind of time?
I used Digg and it was great while it lasted.
I am not sure how many years I used Digg. In the rear-view mirror, it feels like a temporary gig between Slashdot and Reddit.
The answer varies inside and outside the US.
In most countries, Universities offer 4+ year programs and offer accredited degrees. These undergraduate degrees prepare you for even more advanced agrees like Masters or Doctorate ( PhD ). Universities offer medical and law degrees. Universities are the elite schools and are generally only found in larger centres. Colleges on the other hand tend to be vocational and more simply adult study. A college issues a diploma, not a degree and is typically not accredited in the same way. Colleges can be very regional.
You would go to university to get a law degree and collage to get a diploma in criminology. You would go to university to become an engineer and college to become a technician.
In the US, the term college is often used to refer to universities as well and universities sometimes offer a mix of degree and diploma programs. Somebody that went to a state university might refer to it as college. The term Ivy League identifies schools that other countries would identify as universities. In the US, the term community college is more representative of what other countries call colleges. That said, community colleges in the US can be of lower quality than most countries would tolerate ( in my view ).
In Canada, the system is slowly moving towards the US standard. Many colleges or technical institutes are trying to position themselves as universities. There is a rapid increase in the number of colleges, especially those catering to international students.
Any more info on what is meant by the Hacker News comment?
Now they just need to let you run Distrobox in it.