I agree that suicide is a personal decision, so I don't think a person should be criminalized for attempting it. But it's inconvenient for society, so others should be dissuaded from encouraging it. Even if you remove a humanitarian motive, and please don't but this is slashdot so there will be people who will get mad if one doesn't, there are good reasons why the legal system should act to reduce suicide.

Yeah this. Jet Set/Grind Radio looked amazing on the Dreamcast because it didn't render stuff it didn't have to when creating the cel shaded look. Therefore you could have big complex scenes that performed fluidly at all times. I thought that was the point of this game which I haven't played, get off my lawn etc etc.

There's several OSS FPSes built around this concept, but all of them that I've seen have been pretty lo-fi so it would make sense to me that it would take a commercial title to sell it. Finding out that they aren't doing it is not even funny, but just weird to me.

If you're using your phone for something that winds up being the subject of an investigation, then your phone can be subpoena'd. Even if everything is on the up and up, and everything on your device is ducky, you can still be inconveniently deprived of your device for a time. Therefore you should never use your device for work in any way other than calling in to it, which doesn't leave any traces on your device that it doesn't also leave on the network.

Availability of guns enabled the crime of course, but I don't think that being raised around lots of guns is the whole problem here. Grandma said they're all MAGAs. He was raised around a lot of violent rhetoric in combination with guns. Did he have to be wired wrong, or was being programmed from an early age enough?

You can easily add new bus stops near rail, it's not as easy to add rail near bus lines except by luck.

Safe and clean are going to require some upgrades to society. They would be cheaper than what we've been doing, but then some people would get things for free that other people are paying for, and then lots of people would be mad. And not without reason, but not usually for the reason they'd be mad for.

I have cable, it's expensive and they keep raising the prices while offering deals at now (given how much they've increased our bill) around a third of the price for new customers. I live in a small city so I'm not going to see it any time soon, but fiber is going in somewhat nearby and I'd sure like some of that here.

A doubtful premise given Microsoft history, as I've experienced all kinds of minor upgrades/updates breaking software on various forms of Windows over the decades. But even given that, it won't all run it equally well, and Windows 11 is festooned with more crap which has to be dodged. They've also dicked up the interface regarding snap and multiple monitors in a way that causes my mouse pointer to warp incredibly unpleasantly, but I don't try to do multimonitor on a system I also play games on any more so I'll be honest and admit that's not affecting me in that way.

Your point about the legal status is granted. Otherwise, it has a longer support life than Windows 10 Pro. It will be interesting to see how Microsoft supports it when there's more improperly activated users than legit ones. I'm not depending on Windows for anything I can think of these days, but I assume I'll need it to run some configuration utility at some point.

IME "support" is mostly notional anyway. In terms of what will run, it's true that a bunch of PvP games for Windows require Windows kernel DRM, and will not run on Linux. Or, you have a degraded experience where you cannot connect to most servers, and there may also be no anticheat functionality at all. So yes, if you want to play those games, you will still need Windows.

Otherwise, most games seem to work on Linux now, including a bunch of older games that don't work well on modern Windows. Market share is only a matter of time if Microsoft keeps alienating users.

How many religions call for removing internet access? Even the Amish don't do that any more. Or at least the Amish around here don't. The Amish gave up on trying to keep their followers from having cell phones and internet access because they still needed to interface with the rest of the world for buying and selling basic stuff. They did fine with mail order from the Sears catalog and such up until the 1990s, perhaps a bit later, then with so much moving to online sales and electronic payment it was allow electronic communications. starve, or see people leave the religion for good.

Sure, but on some level everyone has to take something on faith to make sense of the world with the limited bandwidth in our tiny shiny human brains. We can explain a lot of things with science but we still don't understand things like why or how the universe began. Some choose to fill in those blanks with religion.

If I'm reading the fine article correctly this isn't just about WiFi. They had a ban on cable internet in place already. A ban on fiber internet is being put in place, likely more of closing a loophole than anything really new as people could argue that fiber is not cable. The WiFi ban is likely also closing a loophole as people were signing up for WiFi service to their homes, using WiFi at cafes, or such so as to get faster internet than they could have with cellular. I'd expect the next step to restricting communications is somehow getting cellular internet slowed or restricted somehow. Then people might be using 14.4 bps cellular modems for internet, that way they can LAN party like its 1999.

Anyone else have a Motorola Timeport with the serial interface cable for mobile internet access? I believe I got rid of mine in 2006. Someone must still be making some kind of equivalent yet.

With no WiFi there's no cheap and easy way to leach off what little internet access is allowed for government and approved businesses. With the remaining access to the internet by the general public restricted to mobile phones there's a single point of access, and this is controlled to where they can shut it down quickly. The justification for shutting off cellular phone access is that the system has been used to trigger explosives directly.

Thinking of remote triggering of explosives I'm reminded of reading something about a deputy sheriff coming to some kind of mine or demolition site to register some complaint. There were big *HUGE* signs that any RF gear was restricted inside the area. The deputy demanded the work stop until he saw some paperwork. The foreman showed the papers, the deputy went to his cruiser, keyed up the mic on his radio to verify the papers where legit, and... the explosives went off. It's not like this was any kind of special radio, likely 50 watt UHF business band radio that produced just enough RF noise to set off the primers on the explosives. It was a good thing that the area was cleared before this yahoo cop violated a very basic safety protocol. If there's an intention to set off explosives from a distance then they can use mobile radios instead. This is off the shelf stuff, and can allow for communication range over miles. To avoid random triggering like in the example I gave they can put in a bit more work on the filters and such than that used for demolition work.

Tracking down WiFi to locate and punish those violating the restrictions is likely trivial enough to keep people from trying it, especially if the punishment is severe. What might be difficult to trace is satellite internet. I'm not sure what kind of power, frequencies, and such that satellite internet uses. With the ability to focus and direct the RF up to satellites I'm guessing that this could be difficult to track, at least from the ground. The connection to any devices would have to be by wires, of course, or it's just back to having easily located WiFi again.

"I am willing to bet any of the Trump picks are better than you, both ethically and professionally."

A number of them were clearly picked, off of the Faux News rotation no less, specifically because they have no ethics and no professional qualifications for their jobs. So absofuckinglutely not.

"Plus, there is still very little native game support."

Do not want. Ironically, it's easier to run old Windows games on Linux than old Linux games.

The problem with getting a degree right out of high school is taking on debt for an education that might not provide enough return on investment to pay for itself.

I'd recommend a high school graduate to go to a trade school, join the military, or find some decent work for a bit before deciding to go to university or not. If their training as a truck driver, plumber, electrician, hair stylist, or whatever works out for them then that can be a career that pays off better than going to university. If that doesn't work so well then consider taking on the loans for university. If the work is in something that requires any kind of certification or licensing then that's as much a ticket to a good income as a university degree. Just having the willingness and clean record for a CDL can open doors for work. I did work installing printers, network gear, and such where part of the job was driving a 2-1/2 ton truck. I got the job because I was willing to drive the big truck. I didn't need a CDL but if I had one then that would have put me ahead of anyone else that wanted the job. My degree helped but they were interested in someone that could and would drive a truck, had some kind of IT certification, and some minimal work history to show reliability and basic computer skills.

If the path taken was military service then that's something like 3 to 5 years of training and experience in something that can likely be leveraged into gainful employment, and an IOU from Uncle Sam for paying for a university degree if that's where they'd want to go. If the degree still isn't working out after military service and time in university then there's likely a spot in the military again, only this time with prior service and a degree there's options for advanced rank on re-enlistment, an option for officer training (warrant or commissioned), as well as more likely to get a more desirable job or change of station than before.

"Which historical trends are you looking at?"

People only getting more days off through social unrest and violence.

It was how the wealthy avoided the draft. The working class had to be more creative.

During the Vietnam era it was difficult for anyone of the working class to avoid military service. While they might not avoid military service they could likely avoid having to see combat. The National Guard was rarely called up for service in Vietnam so if someone had their number come up in the draft they could serve 2 years in the regular Army or Marines (one year training and one year in combat) as a draftee, or they could volunteer for three years in the National Guard playing soldier in case the Soviets decided to start World War Three. Enlisting in the Navy, Coast Guard, or Air Force might also keep someone from going to Vietnam, and if they did end up in the vicinity of Vietnam then it was on a ship or an Air Force base quite distant from any front line combat.

The draft may have turned universities into Animal House but it also turned the National Guard into drinking practice and adult daycare. Because so many people were drafted the National Guard could have a pick of who they'd take. That means people that scored high on the ASVAB (or whatever the Vietnam War equivalent was called), and people that had politicians ask for favors to get their son in the National Guard (or other "safe" position in the military) where they'd not be sent to combat. This was not healthy for the US military and is why we are not likely to see another draft in the USA ever again. The end of the draft would have helped keeping some of the unmotivated out of university, the continued decline in the quality of education after the draft ended would have come from something else. I'd guess a lot of draft dodgers liking the life at university stayed to become professors and staff was part of that decline.