Keep in mind that just because a program or lib is old does not mean it is vulnerable. Many decades-old libs continue to do their jobs well and in a reasonably safely way because they were well thought out from the start.

Almost everything you said about Reddit is true, but it's also the only place I occasionally find answers that are actually helpful or at least point in the right direction. The trick is learning to filter out the teenage trash.

Many, from KDE/Gnome on Slackware to currently Linux Mint and Ubuntu.

The problem I have with the Linux desktop in general falls into three parts: The lack of consistency between the various desktops and the applications that interact with them, problems with drivers (when they work great, but when they don't you have to find a solution yourself) and sooner or later the updates fail in such a way that the only way to recover is to install the new version of the distro from scratch.

Windows is not free from flaws (it has several) but it is consistent, copy and paste for example always works the same way between all applications, and it maintains compatibility to the point where you can run applications from ten years ago without problems , this is really important when you have good applications that you use but that are no longer updated.

P.S: It's important to note that Microsoft is apparently doing its best to trash the advantages of compatibility and consistency after Windows 7, which is why I believe that I will eventually have to move to Linux if I still want a operating system for work instead of a toy.

Not yet, because in my honest opinion Linux deskop, at least in my attempts, is still crappy. But I'll probably be forced to migrate to it when Microsoft pulls the plug on Windows 10 because Windows 11 is even worse than the current desktop Linux.

Who knows, maybe the forced migration of the majority of Windows 10 users to Linux will be the push that the people who develop Linux desktops need to finally get their act together.

It's worse when you are aware of the bloat and you can (and want) to avoid bloat on your site but your boss demands that you use the trendy (and extremely bloated) framework "because it will save time".

I follow what I believe to be a simple rule when involving the GPL in the projects of the company I work for. If I use a code fragment or a GPL lib in a project of mine (which is closed source, I can't provide the source code for it even if I wanted to) and I make some change to that GPL code that improves it in any way, I have no problem sharing the changes I've made to that GPL lib. But pay attention to the detail that I would share what I modified in the GPL lib but under no circumstances would I share (and I couldn't) the code of my entire project - of which the GPL lib is only a small part.

And not long ago a company showed up here claiming that I would have to pay a license for a GPL lib, and charging a really high price for that license. What did I do? I simply put my laziness aside, and spent some time making code that completely replaced the GPL lib and now does the job better than the lib did, and the lib company didn't make a penny. Code that I could have shared with the other users of that GPL lib if they weren't so fanatical.

What do you do with clinically insane people? They have no way of living normally in society, they end up having to be admitted to psychiatric hospitals for their own safety. And religious people, especially the most fanatical ones, are clear cases of clinical insanity to varying degrees and history proves again and again and again that these people cannot be let loose in society. Unless you like the massacres they love to cause in the name of [insert your favorite deity here].

See my sig, It's been the same for a few years now.

It is my sincere opinion that religious people should be segregated from modern society, treated as people who cannot answer for their actions and therefore cannot live without adult supervision. And the most fanatical of them should be treated like the irrational, wild animals they are, and locked up forever in a cage so they can't put anyone at risk.

the overwhelming majority of people don't have more than one computer at home, and even fewer need to share data between them in a way that would justify having a web server on one of them. By putting up a web server you are potentially opening up your computer unnecessarily to possible hacking attempts, and to run a "graphical web interface" your memory usage starts at 200MB when you could be using a tenth of that for the same job.

In short, you're wasting a lot of resources to build your local application that you wouldn't need to do this, purely because "it's easier to make a web application". And don't even give me the pathetic excuse of "resources are cheap now", it's because of this idiotic way of thinking that today we have applications that should be simple trying to take control of all the computer's resources.

Because it's a huge waste of resources when you're making a local desktop application, when you could simply use the resources already made available by the desktop operating system. You're not going to be serving anything over the network so there's no reason to use a web server and even worse, using "applications" made by hacking on top of a protocol (http) that was never designed for this.

I took a look at the resource usage of the thing and how it's implemented. Using a web server for a local desktop application, really? I can't imagine anything more mentally retarded than that. And 3GB of RAM for what amounts to a buggy autocomplete? 40GB of disk usage? I know I'm old school but that's an absurd waste of resources.

In fact, until recently Microsoft really cared about backwards compatibility. But the developers who took care of it retired and were replaced by web "developers" and since then I'm seeing a spiral towards the bottom of mediocrity.

Why, why in Hell would a private company put private code on a public GIT server?

How will this "artificial intelligence" have any idea that it is dealing with sensitive data and that it should not repeat this data in other interactions with other users?

Answer: Never, because it's just a fancy auto-complete and nothing that can indeed understand what it's generating, let alone identify when it's dealing with something that should be restricted.

And if you draw attention to the fact you are called a Troll. I know this facet of human beings very well.