>"The person who wrote this law must be one of the most utterly moronic person on earth"

How is it any less ridiculous than so-called "gun free zone" laws? Let's just pass a law that says it is illegal to have a gun in area X. But area X is not controlled, not patrolled, not searched, not secure. The only people who would abide such a law, and de-arm themselves, are exactly the good people who follow laws and have no intent of violent crime, including the people who have zero record and with concealed carry permits. Meanwhile, the criminals carrying illegally don't give a **** about laws and now have a wonderful target area where it is even LESS likely they will meet any resistance. The exact opposite of the desired outcome.

They might as well just pass a law making everywhere a "crime free zone. There, all our problems are solved! There is no shortage of stupid.

>"First, the gun problem is pretty much specific to the US"

The 2A is not a "problem", nor is good people owning/carrying guns. There are problems with violence, both with and without guns, and that is not "specific to the USA". There are also problems with enforcement and follow-through for existing gun laws. Worrying about 3D printers is ridiculous. But so are many other types of "gun control" like so-called "gun-free zones."

>"Second, in a country which just this year has had 21 school shootings as of today,"

"School shootings" is a semantically-overloaded term. Most are not in the school, but on property around the school. Usually those shot are also not related to the schools and often not even during school hours. I am not saying it isn't a problem, but the data are often twisted to make it sound far worse than it is. And that is the case with the article you cited. They hide the ACTUAL data, like category of who was shot, when, exactly where (inside, outside, field, woods, parking lot), and full circumstances. Their data INCLUDES self-defense use, for example. It INCLUDES non-school gang-related activity. It INCLUDES at night or non-operating hours. It INCLUDES a public sidewalk or edge of the woods, or parking area far away from any building.

>"the real problem isn't printed guns. It's a whole set of cultural, social, political, and governance flaws which need to be fixed"

Agreed.

>"Citizens of other nations don't feel a moment of panic and start scoping out shelter and escape routes when they hear some random loud bang while walking down the street."

Neither do perhaps 99%+ of Americans. The vast majority of the gun crime is focused in small geographical spots in the USA.

>"Yet ironically, the "land of the free" is now a Fascist dictatorship"

That is, of course, nonsense.

>"Leave the 3D printers alone"

Agreed.

>"That's a bummer. guess I'll get a thinkpad then, thanks"

After many years, I have yet to be disappointed with Linux on ThinkPads. And I am especially happy with the latest AMD based ThinkPads. So I do recommend them.

It is funny, at our local Linux User's Group, nearly everyone brings a ThinkPad to the meetings, sitting in front of them.

>"When will Linux be stable on the Snapdragon X?"

And your answer will need to come from Qualcomm, not from Linux. Because, from my understanding, it is their fault.

>>"what you meant to say was MS was a blue state up until the mid 1960's and what happened then? HMMMMMM"
>"Political realignment. Basically the Reps and Dems switched places ideologically."

That is a myth.

https://newstalk1130.iheart.co...

https://rickchromey.com/the-bi...

https://thehayride.com/2026/02...

https://jesterpolitics.com/202...

>"slash has rendered firefox partially inoperative... At least MY installation no longer properly updates stuff on slash."

You need to check your install/settings. I have no problem at all using Slashdot with Firefox. Or any other site, for that matter.

>"if people actually cared primarily about privacy they would not be using Chrome OR firefox."

Really? And what would you recommend over Linux + Firefox + UBO? Because with Firefox configured correctly, I don't think you are going to find a more privacy-capable browser that is high performance, open-source, and compatible with nearly all websites.

>"Been using Brave for a few years now. Just do it, no reason not to"

Yes, there are LOTS of reasons not to.

Better than using Chrome, for sure. But in some ways not. Brave is still chrom*. It still depends on Google code and pretends to be Chrome. And that means it still contributes to extremely dangerous browser monoculture. A security and "standards" nightmare waiting to explode.

Firefox (and children) is the only major multiplatform browser whose code is not dependent on Google's Chromium.

>"Which Performs Better on a Linux Laptop?"

Don't care. I am going to continue to use Firefox on all my machines, no chrom*.

1) The speed differences, depending on the benchmarks and use cases are not that far apart, with Firefox still winning some of them. Same with RAM/power usage. And Firefox wins more with effective element blocking.
2) I want to reduce my Google dependence and exposure as much as possible.
3) I want to reduce Google's control over the web as much as possible.
4) I want to support Firefox/Mozilla, whose browser is more community-driven and open.
5) I want to support truly open standards, not de-facto or forced ones.
6) I don't want a monobrowser culture, which is extremely dangerous, especially when there now only two multiplatform "browsers" left- Firefox family and Chromium family.
7) Firefox is more customizable and configurable.
8) Firefox is more privacy focused and friendly.
9) Full uBblock Origin is a must.

If your site doesn't work correctly in Firefox (which, thankfully, is very rare) YOUR SITE IS BROKEN, NOT FIREFOX.

>"No, you made that up."

Nope. One high-profile example was Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

>"When will right wingers stop lying abut this?"

Those fighting "DEI" will stop telling the truth about it when racism and sexism are no longer promoted in candidate selection. When Diversity of THOUGHT is the important factor, not diversity of physical characteristics. When the Marxist concept of Equity is replaced with Equal Opportunity. When Inclusion is not twisted to mean mandated presence (targets, quotas, etc). It shouldn't be a "wing thing".

>"That's all DEI was, is finding new candidate pools..."

No, it wasn't. That is what it was CLAIMED to be by those who support it. But in reality it was about giving preferential treatment to, often to fill quotas for, women and racial minorities. And when those quotas aren't met, standards are lowered to magically make more people qualify that otherwise wouldn't. Remember, the "E" in "DEI" is "Equity", which is the act of trying to force equal OUTCOMES not equal OPPORTUNITY. That is diametrically opposed to merit.

In most cases, there had been no lack of applicant supply nor qualified people to fill positions. There was a lack of positions and competition for those slots. Rather than choosing the best candidates based only merit (skills, education, experience, capability, etc), DEI was pressuring (for forcing) the consideration of factors that should not matter or be considered, like race and sex.

In relation to this article and this industry (air traffic controllers), you very much don't want to lower standards. You might want to look at the standards to make sure they are actually relevant. You might want to broaden your advertising of positions open to target different areas that might not have heard about or considered applying. But that is not DEI.

>"I don't see any crimes here"

Then you need to educate yourself. It is pretty clearly a crime to vandalize property. And it is also a crime in many jurisdictions to set off fireworks. It is where I live. And directing them at people is clearly makes them a weapon.

And then there is the shooting (not these defendants) in which an officer (who was, unarmed, not that it matters) in the neck is beyond reason. It was a charge of attempted murder.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-n...

>"In researching this, the main choices were basically Nutanix or Proxmox. Since Proxmox was free/open source, I went to try that out."

XCP-ng/Xen Orchestra. It is also free/open source, has a large install base, has been around longer than Proxmox, has optional commercial support, and does have some distinct advantages. Both it and Proxmox are great platforms for many use cases. IMHO, any exploration of FOSS virtualization that doesn't include both Proxmox and XCP-ng/Xen Orchestra is flawed.

>"The most warped thing is that, with ideologues doing jobs that ought to be in the hands of pragmatists, when hits like this keep coming, they will employ their belief system to rationalize doubling down, rather than recognizing a disastrous policy and reversing course."

So your "solution" is to just throw open the borders and let people flood in illegally or with 99.9% bogus "asylum" claims? Mostly those who can't speak the language, have few skills or resources, and sometimes might not be compatible with American values?

No thanks. I would rather increase the numbers and speed of legal immigration and only as a selective process based on merit. While also fostering programs that encourage and support child-rendering.

It might still be inevitable that population declines. I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing, as long as it is not rapid and we stop having entitlement ponzi/pyramid schemes that fall apart when we can't continue to pile unsustainable debt on the next generations.

>"Due in no small part to the fact that anytime someone proposes even the most milquetoast of gun control proposals, the right-wing shoots it down"

That's because most of the "gun control" (euphemistically phrased as "gun safety") proposals do not address the actual problems. They restrict, erode, or destroy the Constitutional rights of the law-abiding usually without actually improving anything, and sometimes making the problems worse.