Desktop Linux had roughly 0.62% share of the Desktop in 2009, 0.7% in 2010, 1.0% by 2013. 2% in 2018. 3% in 2021. 4% 2023-2024, 5% 2025...

That's a 1.14 multiplier annually.

If it continues then 10% Desktop share in 2031 (90% Skynet), 15% by 2034, 20% in 2036, 30% by 2039, and 50% by 2043, and 100% by 2048.

A standard golf ball is 42.67 mm. Average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384 400 km.

If we can see a 42.67 mm ball at 24 km, then can we see a 4.267 m ball at 2400 km and a 683 m ball on the Moon?

We read "40 moons". Presumably "the Moon as seen from Earth" or with more precision: about 7 degrees angular diameter or 6 degrees squared (I guess).

Then we learn "that you could spot a golf ball from 24 km". Which is very interesting. But can we return to our "Moon as seen from the Earth" reference? Could we see a golf ball on one of these "40 moons"? No. Could we see a person? Probably not. Could we see a golf course on the Moon?

Apparently math and numbers scare some people. Most prefer "teach me like I'm 5". Can we have both then, please?

You're saying something and saying something else. I could suggest outlining your thoughts, because I think there's an insight in there despite the noise.

Citizens United (2010), I suppose.

Might I suggest that you know your government is corrupt and perhaps you know that most or all politicians are corrupted. Believing in a right-left dichotomy is exactly what the powerful and rich want us to believe. They delight when we repeat their "divide and conquer" talking points and fight their artificial tribal war. Citizens United passed the Supreme Court 5-4 under Obama. Kaspersky was banned under Biden. Dems or "liberals" as one may categorize them are just as "fascist" but with a smile that appeals to some.

Best advertisement for Signal that money cannot buy. Signal is nonprofit, not commercial.

I understand there is great irony and hypocrisy in US/NATO/Ukr's Russian security policy against a Russian security company that helped an American company fix a security vulnerability attacking Russia from presumably US/NATO/Ukr.

But perhaps you can explain "un-personed"?

It would be USEFUL to distinguish rocks from moons around Saturn. However, we must expect an emotional response if the Earth's Moon (Luna) were demoted to anything but "Moon". I am sure that any proposal where the Moon is not a "Moon" would be rejected (whether useful or emotional or both).

> By saying "demote" ... an emotional response to those classifications.

There certainly was an emotional response for and against Pluto and definitions, but perhaps not to the verb "demote". Given the pending prospect of hundreds of newly discovered members included into an old classification, then a distinction (sub-category) was desirable and useful. Whether "promote" and "demote" or "categorise by mass" or "distinguish by orbital dominance", IMO, is simply a description of what happened: refined categorisation with the result that "Pluto was demoted from (Large) Planet to Dwarf Planet".

Perhaps the extant definition of (Dwarf) "Planet" can apply to (Dwarf) "Moon" with one distinction: A "Planet" orbits Star(s) and a "Moon" orbits Planet(s).

> Remixing from Wikipedia: A dwarf [MOON] is a small planetary-mass object that is in direct orbit around a [PLANET], massive enough to be gravitationally rounded, but insufficient to achieve orbital dominance.

Presumably the dust, rocks, and rings around Saturn conflict with our intuitive understand of "Moon". Yet dust and rocks in rings have not "achieved orbital dominance".

FYI, our Moon has a diameter of 3475 km. Pluto's diameter is 2377 km. Size or mass may not be sufficient, but rather (or in addition): a distinct orbit.

We all more or less agree. Definitions are refined to preserve extant common understanding. Dust and rocks may be a satellites but not "Moon", otherwise it's all just stuff around stuff around stuff. A "moon", as we all intuitively agree, is a "planet like object that orbits a larger planet".

As far as I am and our ancestors were concerned, The Sun and Moon have always been "wandering stars" (plántes astéres), aka "planets" visible from Earth. We came to understand the Earth as a "planet" distinct from our Sun "star" around 1610 (give or take a century) when Galileo Galilei discovered "moons" around Jupiter. We later accepted Neptune and Uranus as wandering massive "planets" visible by telescope. We got carried away with Pluto for a generation and rolled back when we refused to accept hundreds of rocks as "planets". Thus "moon" too must be rolled back and refined as we refused to accept hundreds of rocks as "moons".

It's often what's not mentioned (nor considered) where the bias and agenda lies. Within a stable marriage, housework equity alone is not an ideal. Rather, it's TOTAL work and family care that must be considered or balanced. Housework is naturally more compatible with family care. Perhaps, as I suspect is the case, women who want more children want NO paid work (not 4 days, but 0 days). Naturally, the husband will work more for pay. And single parenting is difficult, plus work is nearly impossible. Single parents need -equity- aka help. But a married couple can find an optimal balance as a team.

It's been our dream for a lifetime plus 70 years!

> dream .. for fair, 5 year, copyright [for] *encouraging* creativity ?

Separate arguments. I hope the first argument is found valid.
Namely that "downloading is not nec. seeding, and thus not in itself illegal".
That is entirely separate from the argument that "USING the data without rights is (il)legal".