>"Your experience is not an indication of a good practice."

My experience is normally updating frequently. But it is still on my schedule, when I choose to do it. I wouldn't say it is bad practice, especially since I am aware when the rare high-priority update is released. The few that are not updated that I mentioned are those that are intentionally isolated (and are safe regardless).

>"Linux is somewhat sheltered because of its low adoption as a desktop operating system."

That is true. But it is also generally more secure, outside of its obscurity. And updates usually come out much faster. And most do not require rebooting.

>"What a shit show Microsoft has become."

I don't remember it NOT being. Although I guess it depends on comparisons to which point in the show.

And I thought I heard they were 'listening to their users' and trying to undo some of their "mistakes". Hmm. Any word yet of removing forced cloud logins? Ads in the menus? Changing browser choice/settings without permission? Removing artificial hardware requirements? Opting out of "AI"?

>"These days, it's literally not even *safe* to fail to upgrade to the latest version of whatever software.[...]The days of upgrading when you want to, are a relic of the 1990s."

Seems to work fine for Linux. I update only when I choose to on all my machines. Granted, I don't let most of them get much behind. But there are those that are intentionally left alone, and need to be, for various complex reasons.

To what are you alluding?

Basically everyone who lives in the area or studies the climate or hydrology would tell you that you're insane.

More like a once-in-a-millennium event. Though I suspect it's going to be considerably more common going forward.

Deserts have some amount of normal precipitation, too. And when you get a lot less than normal, that's called a drought. Yes, even in a desert.

We do have pretty good data from tree rings. Unless you think the trees came from somewhere else?

And yours is a monarchy, with the closest thing to a constitution only being a charter that only guarantees any rights at all to barons and nobles, whose descendants to this day still hold their titles and rights from ages past. The only thing it promises, but does not guarantee to you, is a jury trial. You guys sentenced Markus Meecham to jail and a fine en banc, putting a felony conviction over his head making him unemployable, over a youtube comedy that didn't involve any kind of violence or threats. The only way he makes a living at all is because he's paid by an American company to entertain his viewers.

And for voting...well...you don't even get to vote for your German head of state, who is not just for life, but by birthright to each successive generation he begets. Your prime minister legally only acts in an advisory role, who your king has the power to veto.

Anyway, how is ol' Boris doing?

I know a lot more about this subject than you do, Pootin.

>"A Trump surcharge. Gasoline is now averaging $4 a gallon thanks to his and Israelâ(TM)s war."

Yeah, it is almost approaching the Biden surcharge for gas...
Jan 2021 average $2.39, June 2023 over $5. Hopefully it will drop a lot soon. Time will tell.

https://ycharts.com/indicators...

Who's anus did you felch this turdbit from?

https://x.com/spacex/status/18...

Unlike you, I'm a strong believer in giving credit where credit is due, regardless of what else I think about whoever it goes to.

Without Elon there's no SpaceX. Full stop. He bet everything on it twice. And unlike you, it hasn't received *any* federal government subsidies either. The ESA, NASA, Rocketlab, Blue Origin, and many others were essentially betting against the idea of reusability, the ESA in particular making fun of the idea in a press statement, and Elon in particular who was the only one in the industry pushing hard for it, not only to the engineers, but investors. The rest is history.

Shit in one hand, wish in the other, and see which one fills up with what you consider to be edible faster.

Is this a 3.5% charge on the value of the sale? Or on just the actual shipping charges? Because if it is the former, it is just a money grab because the value of the total sale has nothing to do with how much it costs to ship. That is determined by size and weight.

Can't read the referenced article, and other articles I tried don't say.

Note that surcharges are usually temporary for what is expected to be temporary unusual market swings. Amazon did this in the past, in April 2022 and then dropped it in 2023 as prices normalized again. And that was a 5% charge, not 3.5%.

I'm sure that where you're from, that's exactly what would happen. I'd bet on it, even.

Effectively the argument is that by doing a split, you're going to reduce the market cap, which is total nonsense. In fact, usually the exact opposite happens after a split.

There's no rhyme or reason to this argument whatsoever. You guys are just fucking dumb.

The number of shares outstanding has zero relevance to that. What you're arguing falls entirely on trade volume. How are you supposed to increase trade volume if, as retardedsilvergun says, you're trying to keep the total number of shares outstanding to a minimum? That does exactly the opposite.

He's just one of many. Forcibly removing privacy from the internet, one service at a time.

Fuck collectivism.