Dear Slashdot users,

I see a lot of analysis and discussion about possible improvements in Windows and comments on previous versions. I am aware some applications and games cannot be made to run on Linux, and I am aware of some minor problems on Linux (sometimes the audio crackles?). But I think if you are on Slashdot you should have at least one computer running Linux.

Have you tried Linux lately? If you have no favourite distro, maybe try Linux Mint. Linux Mint is:
Safe: There is no worry of viruses and other malware, and probably not of ransomware either
Reliable: Crashes are rare and so are reinstallations or other serious problems and there are no forced updates
Easy to use: If you can use Windows 7 you can use Linux Mint Cinnamon, I have had non-computer people using Linux Mint just fine for years with only one problem between them
Efficient: Linux uses less RAM, CPU and storage space and can be used quite well on Windows computers you'd have to throw out
Private and ad-free: Linux Mint sends no telemetry or other data and there are definitely no ads as part of the OS
Inexpensive: With Linux you can buy a computer half as often, never have to pay for virus removal or anti-virus software or things like that, and possibly never have to pay for software again
Free and open: You are not forced to do anything and you can delete any program you like (well, there's systemd), and there's no vendor lock-in to screw you over

As for applications like Microsoft Office Linux runs Google Docs, Office 365, Onlyoffice and Libreoffice fine. I use Libreoffice myself to no detriment. It seems most applications can be made to work on Linux, natively or with Wine or Virtualbox or other emulator. But even if you specifically need an application for work or can't live without a certain game that you can't get going on Linux, I still think you should have at least 1 Linux computer in the house.

Linux comes with many excellent applications like Firefox, Libreoffice, the GIMP, Inkscape, Blender, the GNU Compiler Collection and many other programming languages, GRASS GIS, Audacity, Google Chrome, Brave browser, Frozen Bubble, Battle for Wesnoth, PysolFC, Freeciv and hundreds of other applications and games.

Download Linux Mint Cinnamon from here and try it out on a spare computer. And there is usually good and free tech support.

Oh, you're racist?

Yes, some applications are only available for Windows, though I think most applications and games can be made to run on Linux. Windows being a "standard" here or there isn't relevant... The point is that Linux is a better OS that has your best interests in mind, the opposite of Windows.

I'm not sure homophobe and transphobe are things. Could it be that he just has real moral fibre and believes in right and wrong in ways you disagree with? There's no need to call him mean names.

I'd rather be called an asshole than do something I think is wrong, for example, act as if a man is a woman when I think he is not.

I assume you probably have tried Linux, which so far as I know has never had bloatware*, but could you let me know why you reject Linux?

* Does Linux Mint including Libreoffice count as bloatware? It doesn't run by default and uses no system resources unless you start it and is pretty darn useful.

Great! I totally agree with you. I like what Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker's apparently said, "Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong.".

This next story is Canadian, too, but in Canada a man, a former school trustee, has been fined 750 000 CAD for campaigning against SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) teaching in BC schools. You may find this "weird and bigoted", which is fine with me for now, but do you agree with me that the state is interfering here?

And I''m asking anyone here on Slashdot, not just you.

I think I'm still against cancelling or social shunning for people saying what they think is true about the most important issue of our time.

I agree that we should have continuous dialogue and "not build walls" for having different views. I am conservative, but I don't think that conservatism is better than liberalism. I think both sides have some good ideas and a lot of bad ideas. I think conservatism is a good thing and liberalism is a good thing. I think we have different kinds of minds that come up with different kinds of ideas, some good, some bad. I think we should cooperate, or put simply, work together. Or at least take turns, which I guess the election system is kind of sort of doing for us. I realise dialogue and cooperation are probably really hard with today's current polarisation, but I can't think of a better idea. I don't want civil war.

I think the internet and probably social media are causing polarisation (and Russian troll farms). Hopefully this is part of the birth pangs of the internet and we'll find a way to grow beyond it.

I posted again about social cancelling versus government restrictions here, which may be helpful though probably not. In summary I think they're both bad and concerning.

I totally agree the US government in the form of border guards shouldn't give people a hard time, or worse, refuse entry, about denouncing Trump or other political views. I don't believe Donald Trump should be president at all and I'm assuming this border guard thing is a symptom of him being an asshole.

Thank you for your reply.

Please let me try again. I don't think I was consciously trying to say they were the same, but I can see how someone might think that. I think I said that because I think they are the same in some ways that matter. Both are significant consequences to people saying what they think is important to say, don't you think?

I really don't think US border guards should give people a hard time for denouncing Trump on the internet. I think that authoritarian control of free speech, even if it's just border guards at this point, threatens Western civilisation itself. I denounce Donald Trump regularly on the internet. I think he's a selfish, narcissistic asshole. I don't think he should be president.

I don't think people should be socially cancelled for saying what they think is true about moral and social issues. I feel it's mostly conservatives getting cancelled for denouncing things they think are wrong and evil, like my comment pointing out evidence that Islam is an evil religion below being downmodded. I think that if people of moral character can't say what they think is true, that this threatens Western civilisation, too.

I honestly don't understand why you think this is dishonest.

I think you are replying in good faith and I appreciate that and I hope to speak in good faith again myself. I will try to explain what I mean by cancelled, though I did not specifically use the term "cancel culture".

I'll take a page from Miss Manners and say that cancelling is modern-day shunning. I might not agree with shunning even if someone really did do something wrong, but I guess that's beside the point. I don't think complaining about TV shows or complaining about some people in their own forum is shunning at all. I am not sure shunning companies is shunning either. Also I can't prove that conservatives are shunned for their views more than liberals.

But I think that cancelling is shunning someone not for their actions but for their views. I am not sure I should refuse to acknowledge someone who believes differently than me, or even if he does things I don't believe in, unless he's trying to get me to do something I think is wrong. Besides the obvious, that we need to say what we think in order to resolve our differences, I don't believe that shunning should be used as punishment for for having views the other person doesn't believe in. I think this is a new thing in society, but I can't prove that I can only point to the fact that it's talked about in society a lot.

Now, if you don't agree that it's something new, that's fine, but my original question still remains of the guy I replied to... does he care about preventing cancelling of people on the other side of the spectrum?

Does that help at all?

I'm not, I actually want to know what he thought about consequences for saying things from the other side of the political spectrum (separately from governmental punishment).

Maybe it's not Islamophobia so much as noticing that Islam is an evil religion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... for a longer list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "Pakistan continues to score poorly on the WPS Index in 2021, ranking 167th out of 170 countries"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "The World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2025 ranked Saudi Arabia as number 132 out of 146 countries, a significant drop if compared to previous years."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Isn't this list much more than enough to show that there is something extremely wrong with the Islamic religion? I predict mental gymnastics in the reply.

I totally agree people should be able to say negative things about Donald Trump or the US government, or even rail against them, and then not have that have consequences for their admittance into the USA. I even think they should be generally accepted into society and not get socially rejected for their views.

Do you feel the same way about right wing causes like being against abortion, gender ideology, Islam? Do you think that people with conservative views should not be cancelled?

Here's a dictionary definition of terrorism.

Do you really believe that Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shabab, Boko Haram, ISIL, etc., are not terrorists?

That may be true, that doesn't mean it's not bad karma for sponsoring murder and terrorism in Israel and/or massacring thousands of protesting civilians. It may help with Iran treating people better.