But NextCloud and OpenCloud already do this while providing the software as FOSS. Set it up yourself and it is free. Want them to host it or support it? Pay.

Those seem like better, more mature solutions than this Open Desk thing.

What he is complaining about is that things like Flatpak make Linux applications work more like macOS. He is mad because many Linux distros are making things more Mac-like to make things easier for users like you. The OP actually wants the prospect of dependency hell because he would rather save a minor amount of disk space than have redundant libraries.

AGI has nothing to do with the current technology that OpenAI is selling. At this point, it is just a nebulous idea. Right now, AGI is just like what cold fusion was twenty years ago. If you had invested like crazy in nuclear fusion companies because you had high expectations for them figuring out cold fusion, you would have lost a lot as fusion is still just a research toy that in no way functions as a profitable business model. As it stands, we do not know whether the existing technology OpenAI sells will ever be profitable. AGI, like cold fusion, may just be a dream.

While there are certainly valid criticisms of how Apple and Google have structured their app stores, blaming them for massive government overreach that they used their extensive lobbying power to fight against is quite a reach. What's next? Will you blame PornHub for the Texas age verification law because, after all, making porn available in Texas is just asking for it?

They should have included a single Python coder and given him the same data in csv files. That would really put Excel into perspective.

It's nice that we can agree that "conservative" means a tyrannical monarchy with massive wealth disparity and no human rights.

How come all of the so-called Oracle disasters end up requiring the client to pay Oracle 10x the initial estimate. I do not think Oracle views any of these as disasters.

How this company continually gets away with it is beyond me.

That's interesting and all, but since this isn't a criminal case it's not exactly on topic. If we're involved in a traffic accident and you are found at fault, you will be liable for the damages. If you crashed into me intentionally you would probably face criminal charges, but if you didn't display any sign of intent, the laws related to using a vehicle as a deadly weapon would be irrelevant to our case.

They're being sued for being complicit in the wrongful death of a teenager. They're not being taken to criminal court for failing to uphold their duty as a mandatory reporter.

If I watch you drown and do nothing, even though I'm a capable swimmer standing next to a bunch of flotation devices, and all of this is caught on camera, your family could probably sue me for causing your death even though I'm not a lifeguard and do not own the pool.

That is the story, although there are some conflicting stories so it's not really clear whether "a patchy server" came before or after using the Apache name.

Either way, as far as Native American references go, I find the use by the Apache Foundation to be relatively benign.

While all the reactionaries in this thread (like the first post) are completely ridiculous with how quickly they pulled out their soapboxes to decry cultural sensitivity as "anti-white" while demonizing liberal white women, there is a small kernel of truth in their complaints that we can be a little too sensitive at times. Backlash against the "Apache" name is an example of that. Unfortunately, they take that small kernel of truth and turn it into a mountain of racism.

Damn you're a pussy. How come all the dudes who pine for "masculine" content are such whiny little bitches?

There are all sorts of action movies with white people on Netflix for you to jack off to. If you're watching the type of juvenile ass movies where casting takes things like race into account to get the perfect racial bingo scorecard, you only have yourself to blame for watching stories created for idiots.

I do not see how your post makes sense as a response to mine, but unlike the poster I was responding to you at least made an argument that was on topic and made sense.

However, I think your post largely misses the point of the complaints against the voucher system. The problem is that it takes money away from public schools to fund schools that have to adhere to less strict academic standards, do not pay teachers well, and often teach religion. Not all private/charter schools are worse than public schools, but if you are able to send your kid to one that is better than public schools you are wealthy enough that you do not need that public money. Nice private schools are not built in low-income neighborhoods.

Your concerns about public schools are also quite the over-generalization. My children attend a neighboring school district because we did not like the cultural fit of our local school district (probably for the opposite reasons of your complaints). Public school districts often reflect the culture and mores of the local community, and if they do not it is very easy to win school board races if your values are more aligned with the community. Where I live pretty much all of the rural school boards are run by conservatives and the urban ones by democrats. Maybe that introduces its own set of problems, but it demonstrates that choice exists without the voucher and charter school systems. Taking public money and giving it to non-public schools might provide even more choices, but those are low-quality choices that function as an anchor weighing down the existing public school system. Who really benefits from vouchers? Those looking to prop up low quality schools for personal profit, religious schools, and private schools that are geographically out of reach for low income students.

A quick search shows that some disgruntled former employee is suing Redhat/IBM for "anti-white, anti-male" discrimination. His legal counsel is "America First Legal."

The guy got laid off and is trying to claim it was because he was white because in the past Red Hat had discussed a desire to add more diversity to the workforce, although there doesn't appear to be any actual evidence that one had anything to do with the other.

Won't someone please think of the poor, disadvantaged, disenfranchised white man!?!

I contend that you were aware of how stupid you post is, but for political reasons you want other people to believe this stupid bullshit, so you posted as AC.

You don't even try to make sense. You just structured nonsense as if it were a zinger. Do you think anyone here is stupid enough to think that you just made a real point?