This is hard for me to commit to an opinion on. I totally understand the argument that systemic injustices of the past have impacts today on the opportunities presented to descendants of affected individuals, therefore proactive steps are required to achieve equity. But solutions like requiring blanket reparations from one race to another seem to take for granted that everyone of the first race has been equally privileged by historical injustices, while everyone of the second race has been equally disadvantaged.

This obviously isn’t true. People of color are disproportionately likely to be disadvantaged, but there are people of color who lead highly privileged lives, and there are white people who are highly disadvantaged due to coming from low socioeconomic class, poor health, lack of access to education, etc.

The concept of reparations being paid on a basis of race necessarily involves the government forcing disadvantaged white, Asian, Latino, and other non-black people to become more institutionally disadvantaged, so that a group that contains highly privileged people of color can become more economically advantaged.

Something absolutely needs to be done, we need to be actively fighting for equity, but it’s hard for me to accept an argument that that should be done on the basis of race instead of addressing the causes of class-based inequality that will benefit disadvantaged black people along with disadvantaged people of other races.

For example, instead of seeking to improve the intergenerational income mobility of POCs in a system that restricts the income mobility of those without wealthy parents, we should fix the system and ensure a level playing field between someone who is born to high-school drop outs, and someone who was born to Ivy League graduates.

Downvoting because “tard”

Yeah, totally respect your opinion, but I emphatically disagree with it. The goal of what’s being discussed here isn’t to maximize production for the sake of shareholders, it’s to maximize quality of life for employees. To that end, five six-hour days are worse than four 8-to-10-hour days.

If I start work at 8 and get off work at 2:30 or 3, I still can’t start my camping trip a day early, or spend the day at the water park with my kids. I still have to give up n x 10 hours of my life, where n is my commute time, assume I work in-office.

I would much rather work until 630 Monday through Thursday, and have an extra day where full-day activities are possible every week. That’s worth more to me than 10 extra hours per week of after-work time.

Of the three major desktop operating systems, windows is by far the worst.

The only advantage windows has is that Microsoft’s monopolistic practices in the 90s and 00s made it the de-facto OS for business to furnish employees with, which resulted in it still having better 3rd party software support than the alternatives.

As an OS, it’s hard to use, doesn’t follow logical convention's, is super opinionated about how users should interact with it, and is missing basic usability features that have been in every other modern OS for 10+ years. It’s awesome as a video game console, barely useable as an adobe or autodesk machine, but sucks as a general purpose OS.

The wording is a little misleading. A “white noise” podcast isn’t just 80 hours of TV static, it might be a recording of a cafe, a bus station, nature, a storm, etc. not something that’s just generated on-device, meaning it’s gotta be streamed.

I would imagine that the relative motion between the entry/exit portal would be more important than the absolute motion of the two portals.

I’ve known a guy for like 20 years, currently in his 60s, who firmly believes that anthropogenic climate change is entirely false.

He has a bachelors degree in physics, a bachelors degree in mathematics, and a Ph.D in economics. He’s written a handful of high level Econ textbooks, he’s worked as a professor off and on at 3 or 4 respected universities here in the US. He was most recently employed at a supply chain consulting firm, making an ungodly amount of money.

By all accounts, he’s an extremely smart, well-educated, well-read guy. But holy shit if that boomer isn’t constantly reposting the most transparently fake anti-science nonsense on his Facebook page. Think, “New research proves that Climate Change is a liberal myth” - The Religious Conservative Storm.

Just demonstrates how it doesn’t matter how educated someone is if they don’t think critically about information that confirms their expectations.

It’s not technically true that Mac is Linux, but people say Mac “is” Linux because they are closely related and function identically for a lot of workflows.

Bear in mind that most people think of Linux in a DE-agnostic way. “Linux” isn’t what your desktop looks like, it’s a collection of a kernel and (mostly GNU) software that is largely shared between many distributions. Mac feels a lot like a different distribution of Linux, with some (or a lot of) quirks.

I’m a SWE and I work heavily in a CLI environment. I can use the same shell with the same software and the same configuration files shared between my Linux machine and my MacBook. Honestly the biggest indicator that I’m on Mac instead of Linux is that I have to remember to use homebrew instead of pacman/apt/etc. Otherwise, I was move my entire Linux workflow to Mac in a day or two, and can maintain the two environments in parallel.

Trying to do the same in windows is… frustrating, and only works at all because of the WSL letting me run a Linux pseudo-VM on top of my windows session.

Did you even read the article, Mr/Ms climate scientist?

He’s asking people not to talk like the world is going to catastrophically end once we hit that 1.5 degrees milestone, because it’s making people feel hopeless and apathetic, which is actually slowing our efforts to change.

And he’s totally right. If the government told people a meteor the size of Texas was going to impact earth in 12 hours, there would be effectively zero effort to stop it. If you tune in to a lot of the conversation around climate change from people who are not climate scientists, but who want to leave a better world for their kids and believe climate scientists, they feel hopeless. It feels like a foregone conclusion that we are going to go over the 1.5 degree goal (probably because it is), and if we think the biosphere is going to collapse when it does, it is really, really hard to take action.

It’s not saying to undersell the risks, he’s saying to be truthful about the risks. We can definitely still salvage complex life on earth with optimistic, consistent effort, but recent media coverage has been giving the impression that it’s too late. This is bad and counterproductive.

Keep on fighting the good fight brother/sister.

Just so you know, you don’t have to announce if you’re leaving a community. Just go. Nobody cares

My brother in Christ, I don’t know who it was that hurt you but it wasn’t me. Being this emotionally invested in disliking a company is definitely not good for your mental health. Nobody here is even remotely suggesting that any company cares for anything other that maximizing profits. That doesn’t mean that there are no companies that maximize their profits by having a reputation for privacy and security.

If you don’t think my comment was valuable, downvote it and move on. Nobody wants to hear someone cry about how mean the big bad computer company is.

Careful there, expressing an honest take about an Apple decision instead of trying to spin it like it’s evil is a good way to piss a bunch of people off.