I guess that's a no. That's some hardcore raging. Gotta respect just what, sextupling down on being wrong at this point?

Yes, it was bombarded by the Greens. I actually go and read scientific journals. This is why I'm pretty much the only one here on slashdot strongly recommending that people go to scholar.google.com and look for "Degrowth". It's an exceedingly popular topic among the Greens. They lecture on it. They write papers on it. It's mainstream.

While outside of it, people understand that genocide is bad. No matter how benevolent you state your goals are.

You remind me of the charities "saving" people in Thailand from prostitution. Who are always shocked, SHOCKED to find that people they "saved" and "returned to their wonderful villages" are back on the streets within a month.

Turns out whoring out on streets of Bangkok is way better living than subsistence farming. Just like dying from lung cancer at your old age is way better than dying thirty years earlier due to schistosomiasis.

Because if you think lung cancer is bad, google that particular illness. You'll beg and plead for lung cancer after that. And unlike lung cancer, that shit will kill you in a way, way more painful way and much, much earlier. As most of the people living the lives where they actually have to deal with schistosomiasis because they can't afford easy and cheap modern ag automation do. This is the shit that inflicts horrific suffering even on young children helping their parents to work the paddies to generate enough food to survive.

So drop the "benevolent white saviour" act. You're neither benevolent, nor a saviour. You know nothing about the people you're talking about, as clearly visible from "oh noes, lung and hand cancer". These are the problem for YOU, the rich, decadent Westerner. Because problems that poor people are facing have been long eliminated where you live. You actually get to live long enough to worry about cancers.

Hey, I remember the last time your political side used "if only we could save one life" argument as a tool of general population wide policy. Are you sure you want to go down that path again?

>No one is saying that poop people should not be able to improve their lives.

Actually a lot of people are saying this. In scientific research and popular culture. Google "degrowth".

But on top of that, they also do a lot of things to make sure that "poop people" (hell of a freudian slip, tell me more what you think about the poor) stay poor. Denying them cheap energy is one of the biggest things being done. And note the present rather than past tense. Block on loan money to build cheap power across poor nations is one of the largest if not the single largest issues standing in the way of human development in most developing nations today.

You're talking about a completely different topic. Islamic nations for example have charitable donations codified in their religious law even harder than Christianity, and yet they are significantly lower trust societies than Western Judeo-Christian ones.

Ergo there is no meaningful correlation between charitable donations and societal trust.

This is another gross misunderstanding by Greens. Oil contains ALL of the fractional distillation elements. You don't get to pick and choose. And it makes no sense to just extract some and leave most to poison the earth.

This is why reducing demand for individual distillates doesn't really work for reducing total oil consumption. This is why I bitch about rich twats flying. Almost everywhere, the main limiting distillate is kerosene. Jet fuel precursor. The only exception to this was during the pandemic grounding of most tourist flights. If you want to reduce consumption of oil, you need to start with that which is the limiting factor. And in oil, that is kerosene.

So reduce flying. And rich are the ones who do by far the most of it. All while lecturing the rest of us how benevolent they are to the Mother Gaia and how the rest of us need to drive less. Even though gasoline is NOT the limiting distillate, and neither is diesel.

>so why not do linux too/first in your development environment.

Because doing things costs money, and people don't like to burn money on things that have really awful ROI. As in literally no one sane and even passably intelligent does it. You don't burn your house to keep warm in winter, and neither do I. If your goal is to make drivers, you make them for things that have actually meaningful audiences first like windows and mac, and OS/2, DOS and other exotics are an afterthought. GNU/Linux is somewhere between those two extremes.

I'll be among the first cheering them on. Go DOJ!

How's that rage doing? Subsiding yet? Your predictive power has been literally negative one hundred. You keep predicting the opposite of reality. In general, mental models are aimed at predicting reality. What does it say about yours?

Perhaps this would be a good time to reconsider some of your presuppositions?

There certainly is hypocrisy to go around, but nothing comes even close to the Green hypocrisy. Greens hate the poor and want them to die off, so they don't rape Mother Gaia as they do en masse today. Degrowth being the mainstream Green ideology today is literally nothing but that once you squeeze out all the pretty words and go to what it means to "degrow humanity". They don't hide this either, just google the papers on Degrowth and read the shit that would make the most hardcore eugenicists of the 20th century suggest that this may be over the line. But they also want to look like they're helping the poor at the same time, because they seem themselves as part of the political Left, the movement that sells itself on wanting to help poor people.

This is why you get so much impotent rage against this post, mostly spamming red herrings and calling me names. When you're a grifting aristocrat, you like to lie not just to your peers and outsiders. You also like to lie to yourself that you are a truly benevolent human. And it really hurts your self image when this discrepancy is being pointed out.

>the poor people that you are attempting to side with live downwind from the fossil fuel plants, and will have shorter life expectancy and lower residual property values

We were talking about Big Oil. The only place rich enough to burn oil in fossil fuel plants are Middle Easterners.

Red herring denied.

See my other post for just one example. There are many others:

https://slashdot.org/comments....

Sure. A good example is my desktop still runs Creative Audigy 2 sound card. It's a PCI card. The original one, not the current PCI-e.

Drivers are unobtainium from Creative. But there's a guy called Daniel_K who hacked together old driver package to work on win 7 and win10 (which even works on win 11!). So it works fine. And I can still run EAX games with proper support.

https://danielkawakami.blogspo...

This is what big enough of a community does. It means that there's a relatively much higher chance that someone also wants their rare hardware config to run on a modern OS, far beyond what manufacturer would want to let you due to planned obsolescence and maintenance costs. And just make the damn thing work.

I really wish this was true. But it's been the exact opposite so far. For most of the "kinda not supported for some reason" hardware, you can usually find a driver. If for some weird reason (usually because it's a really old piece of kit) you can't, you can usually either find a driver for older version of windows that will still work... or someone who modded the said older driver to work on your OS.

On linux, you're just SoL. There's not enough people to generate the numbers to care about that sort of thing, and linux backwards compatibility tends to be the one thing in which it absolutely loses to windows as an operating system. That is one area where microsoft has unironically beaten pretty much everyone else, and one of the main selling points of their OS.

And that is why win11 "we don't support chips with no hardware TPM 2.0" was received with so much screeching. It went against basic principles people are used to. And of course, it was pretty much immediately hacked to install without TPM 2.0, and everyone discovered that this was almost certainly a marketing thing. With tech side of microsoft leaving the old support systems in to allow people to bypass the marketing nonsense as usual.

Notably, that is one thing for which windows team really doesn't get enough accolades for in my view. They actually leave the old stuff in, so you can fix a lot of warts caused by marketing and design teams by just re-enabling the old stuff.