You have a point. It's funny he made the blog considering how dismissive of him the company was. They don't care about his (extremely obvious) suggestion, why should we? If they're going through the trouble of lying about it, it's because they feel their approach is more profitable.

I wish I had mod points. The guy you're replying to is a tool.

Did we just witness the writing equivalent of an internet tough guy?

Nonsense. Arch is now harder to configure with systemd. The Arch maintainers do believe in "Keep it Simple", but to them, simplicity is elegance. They adopted systemd because they believe it is the more elegant solution. Ease of use is not their primary concern, obviously, and this is really damn far from an "automagic desktop" distro. The very claim is quite ridiculous honestly.

The area where live is very atheist. Most of the religious people are immigrants who kind of stay in their own communities. Of the native citizens who are religious, only the older generation goes to church. Last time I went to a church almost everyone had white hair. I don't think there is any pressure here to hide your atheism, so I doubt that this is what's preventing us from forming little comunities. Chalk that up to the reduction of human interation due to 21st century technology, I guess...

I agree, I'm an atheist but I thought that anti-Christian comment at the end was totally out of place and painted the writer of the article as an intolerant bigot. It was totally out of place in the article and really undermines his point.

This is one the things that sucks about being an atheist. Other than the existential dread, of course. I will never really have this feeling of community. I know that I will always be able to count on my close family, but that's where it ends.

I have no belief in god nor any intention to change my mind on the subject, but what you described is pretty appealing.

That's incredible that you are in such a long-lasting marriage despite only knowing the person for 3 weeks before you got married. Weren't you afraid that you didn't know the person well enough? At that point in time, you're still well in the "butterflies in the stomach" phase.

I always figured that the only speech that should maybe land you in trouble with the law is speech that incites violence against a certain group. No matter how much anyone might disagree with the statement above, it's certainly not that. It's pretty disappointing to see the state of "freedom of speech" on the planet these days...

If you really want to, we could go one step further and make the analogy even more complete by giving the person every reason to believe that the one claiming the tiger has been removed is wrong. Maybe the tiger's tail is showing and you can hear a roar every once in a while. "Oh don't mind that, I swear the tiger is gone." Then yes, I guess the analogy is even more accurate. :)

Wow, I'm feeling nostalgia right now. The good old days when running linux was much more of a pain that it is now.

This is where someone jumps in and goes "blah blah blah blah victim blaming! Blah blah blah offensive! Blah blah blah slut shaming!"

Giving advice on how to protect yourself is now seen as victim blaming, so you won't see too much of that. We live in a society where if you jump in the tiger's cage and get eaten, it is considered offensive to say that maybe you shouldn't have jumped in the tiger's cage.

Precisely. I am appalled by the number of Americans in this discussion who seem to think this is fine. I can understand doing this to China cause they're pretty brazen about their espionage, but Germany? Added to the leaks about the surveyance of the Chancellor, this clearly shows the profound lack of trust the Americans have in their allies. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

You're right, Escape-Meta-Alt-Control-Shift is a pretty decent OS. It's too bad that it lacks a proper text editor. Am I doing this right?

I'm not sure they are really enablers, maybe they're a bit more pragmatic. The issue is that despite many people making little PSAs about online bullying, it's not really slowing down. I think it's really the nature of internet to enable this kind of behaviour. If that's the case, any attempt to reach the bullies themselves is pointless. Faced with this, the most sensible solutions are to either stop engaging with the internet, or to try to develop a resistance to it. It might be unfortunate that we have to do this, but as long as the internet provides anonimity, it seems to me to be the only solution. The people saying "whatever it's harmless" have developped this resistance, so they are comfortable online.