Congress has shirked its responsibility to jealously guard its power. That needs to change.

This exactly. I've been saying this since the 90s - Congress needs to stop abdicating its power and actually make laws and balance out the other branches. At least half of our issues are people who as far as I can tell are doing the best they can to make up for Congress doing fuck all, but still having to deal with stuff that wasn't legislated 80 years ago because no one knew about it. The other half are power hungry people. As we've seen very little good comes of this.

It seems obvious to me that we need more than one person to declare a war, or an invasion or whatever. At the very least, it should be someone other than the person wielding the "emergency powers".

I just don't see Congress starting to do anything anytime soon. The incentives just aren't there. I don't know how you get Congress able to do something, because the options seem to be either enable even wilder swings (assuming Democrats ever get back in power and Republicans again after that) through simple majorities OR some fundamental change in people getting along or compromising. The former probably would actually just push us closer to governmental and foreign affairs breakdown, the latter is a Utopian dream.

Yea, now I'm stuck because of security kernel updates, but if you don't care about that - I find EL9 distros like Alma can run for 5 or 6 months on the desktop before it starts getting a little squirrley because of a bunch of mixed launched versions of libraries etc and a reboot clears that all out. If you're running less software you probably could go years, we've seen that at work. However, security will get you in the end.

Most of my Linux upgrades have completed successfully, while most of my Windows upgrades have failed.

I agree with most of this, but I do think this really depends on the versions. I've never had the option to do an in place upgrade for RHEL derivatives till I think v8? Windows 10 circa 2020 and newer OSs actually upgraded Server 2016 and newer surprisingly flawlessly for me, as did Win10 over earlier Win10. Much to my surprise, because Win7 and earlier that was certainly never the case!

Your typical option is digging through forums and trying to find a topic that isn't 5 years old and applies to a different distro than what you're using.
I see you haven't tried to fix Windows problems either. I have the same issue with 5 year old posts talking about Windows 7 when I specifically said my issue is with Windows 10 or Windows 11.

Your typical option is digging through forums and trying to find a topic that isn't 5 years old and applies to a different distro than what you're using.
We end up wiping and re-installing Windows a lot more than Linux at my job. Linux often has a config file you can tweak, you can get into a useful emergency boot mode, and historically the updates to various programs or the OS don't break things.

Windows tools like Crowdstrike boot loop you, Windows Updates to your drivers (that you didn't ask for) break all networking. Sometimes, for no explained reason, software just will not install on one Windows computer but it will on any other Windows computer with the same image and hardware. I've also had Windows just up and ignore the routing tables just today, but other Windows computers with the same image it works fine. These are the reasons I reimage Windows.

Linux however does have a pretty simple copy your home directory to a new install migration though - Windows isn't that easy, you need other tools or are doing a lot of manual re-setup. And those tend to be "sketchy" IME.

With Linux you have to do a wipe with every system upgrade.

Not true for many distros for the last decade or more. Maybe you last used Linux in 2006?

Windows updates usually work.
Windows updates bug out all the time - I see it reported on multiple patch commentary sources. Upgrades seem to be functional *mostly* since Win 10 and 2020 or so. But back in the 2K/XP days? Yea right - no one trusted a Windows OS upgrade.

Linux people are chronically dishonest and dismissive about problems. My own experience with Linux since 1996 has been consistent disappointment, and I've been trying to switch since the day I moved from Win2000 to XP. I've seen little change in the culture of Linux in the last 20 years, and I don't expect they'll get their shit together any time soon.

And no one is dismissive about Windows problems right? Look, I find most of these sorts of comments are based on expecting Linux to be an bug for bug replacement of Windows, when of course it isn't that. Just like a Honda isn't the exact same everywhere as a Subaru, but it's a workable replacement.

It sucks, and that's obvious to the average person. Windows persists because it is "good enough."

Windows persists because of monopoly / anti-competitive pressures and inertia. The amount of people who constantly have problems is insane.

I would, and have. It's generally great - you can have them faff off for 5 years. For people who worked with EL7 when you installed it, it probably works today (I know one where it does), you just need to deal with not getting the security updates. I imagine once updated to EL10 it'll work for a long time after also.

There's large masses of people who have a fixed set of tasks, and if the OS (whether Windows XP/7/10 or EL7/9/10 or whatever) does it after setup - that's all they want, and they don't want to change.

All my worst upgrade disasters in any OS came from in-place upgrades just fucking everything up. At best, it left a lot of old cruft hanging around, at worst it rendered a system almost unusable, and it was usually a bit of both.

That was the old days. In 2003. In 2022 and newer, in place upgrades work a treat, and in fact for desktop OSs, Microsoft is doing that every 6 months or so. Very few complaints.

I strongly disagree - all else being equal, not forcing e-waste is something we should aspire to. Also, being forced to spend a lot of money when my computer otherwise is fine for the tasks just for security patches really is hard for people to swallow.

Not to mention, with stuff like Flatpaks and containers, not to mention VMs - there's no reason legacy software can't continue to work on newer OSs in Linux.

He never should have been forced to answer a question about his personal affairs in the context he was- which is why they did it.
But also- you shouldn't perjure yourself to hide it. As ultimate executor of the laws of the United States... you need to expect better from him.

I don't recall all the details about Clinton, but the part that I always thought was problematic about it and why I thought it was totally political - had to do with questioning and topics that had nothing to do with being the president. I think we need to have an ability for anyone to have a personal life separate from the job. As an electoral issue, sure. I don't think being a good person has mattered electorally maybe ever in the US, so I kinda doubt anyone's sexual predilections or infidelity matters - see JFK, Clinton and certainly Trump. I tend to think removal from office should have a higher bar than "you cheated on your wife" given all the context. I don't know why Clinton didn't plead the 5th, I'm not sure if that was allowed, but I again do feel like context matters.

That seems somehow different to me than official acts - Clinton's BJs weren't official acts as president. Trump (or his allies) has spent a lot of time delineating Official Acts from Personal Acts, and TBH I agree that is important in my views. I might disagree with how they're classifying things, but the concept seems important and was lost in the Clinton Impeachment IMHO.

Trumps phone call with Ukraine at least wasn't a personal social call if I recall correctly - it was an official white house call between leaders. I agree with you, it didn't seem impeachable to me, but I do think it was materially different from getting placed in a corner over an illegitimate (to me) line of questioning.

And that's my problem - Trumps stuff is ?mostly? around stuff like the quid pro quo or yes, the insurrection. It's direct governing stuff directly affecting the rest of the government. Clinton getting a BJ, or Trump's peccadilloes in the bedroom, aren't.

I think the other way to think about this is - we kinda expect politicians to lie, both for the bad reasons of image, but also for national security reasons or stuff being classified. Up until Trump, no one expected a president to challenge the peaceful transfer of power. The day someone tries to Impeach Trump over Stormy Daniels or the like is the day I'll also say that's totally politically driven, and really not that relevant.

Hell, I'll even say, Trumps not wrong that there's a lot of political attacks against him. Like you said with Clinton, that's part of being a President or Former President. The Government hasn't been above getting people for "lesser crimes" in a politically motivated way when they can't get them for "the real crime" - think Al Capone. And I'm sure some of the cases were purely stuff like that. Doesn't change the fact that they were still crimes, and I probably wouldn't have opposed bringing a perjury charge against Clinton once his term was down - though I also probably would have thought it was a bit of a waste of time.

It's very clear to me that if we survive this second term, Trump in general has really highlighted a lot of issues with the American system, that's for sure.

One big thing that is missing here is that computers are cheap. Running a Cricuit has an obvious answer - set up an old computer and lock it to that version of Windows and keep it behind a firewall and turn off updates. There's not much of a benefit to updating the OS for a computer that exists solely to run a piece of proprietary hardware, at least until you change the hardware for whatever reason. So you can avoid Win 11 there.

TBH, OSX has many barriers too, plenty of software is Windows Only. The question is simply, is that software worth all the costs of using Windows? Many people think it is, but I'm going to argue that MS also has lost a lot of leverage with so many people doing more and more on their iOS or Android devices. I kinda think this is what started forcing more developers to be more cross platform, not that it really helps with desktops. But TBH, I'm seeing more and more stuff where the desktop version is legacy and has issues, and the answer or work-around is to use the app.

Are lots of people watching streaming on their computers? Everyone I know uses a phone, tablet if on the go, or a TV / Roku to TV etc if at home.

I will say - the best thing I ever did was starting to go cross platform on my programs back in the day, so when I did transition to Linux it was mostly copy over the config files and data. If you're starting now, it's easier than ever to start migrating to cross platform programs while staying on Windows, and it's also easier to have more locked down single purpose computers which I personally think is a good idea regardless of OS. I wasn't happy when a video game broke my ability to do some part of my college work back in the day, and I would like it even less if a Circuit program somehow interfered with my job. Keep them separate and all this is less of an issue IMHO - you can have the Cricut computer and it doesn't matter much about the OS, you just need it to run the Cricut. etc...

Network Effect. I just tell people the forms of communication I accept and let them do what they want to do. I figure if Signal, SMS, E-mail, or postal mail are all unacceptable to someone, I so far have had 0 need to communicate with them.

To that same vein, Clinton was "untouchable".

I suppose this may be my blinders, but at least to me, it seemed like there were things Clinton could have done that would have successfully had him removed from office. Just that lying about a (AFAIK) consensual affair while in office wasn't one of them. I'm not sure anyone could have conceived of a president doing what Trump has done in the late 90s, so saying whether there was a line then that would have the Democrats vote to remove in the Senate is probably impossible to say.

I can imagine that if Clinton did what Trump once bragged he could do - "Walk up to someone on 5th Ave and shoot them in the face in daylight" - I like to think the Democrats would have had a problem with that and removed him. I like to think if Biden had done that (i.e. in 2023 or something much closer in time) they would have voted to remove. I'm not so sure about Republicans and Trump. Not least because of Trump's brag about it, and generally "how right" he's seemed about his cult of personality over time.

Of course, discussing hypotheticals is fraught with peril - there's no real way to back up what intuition is correct.

  But I mean... is it the most fucked up shit that has happened within the Executive branch? Na, not really.

No, probably not. I think many people forget the Andrew Jackson presidency where I seem to recall my history book in school claiming he said at one point (I think in reference to the trail of tears incident) about the Supreme Court "Their ruling and what army?" in terms of forcing him to follow a court ruling. Given the US didn't fix it then, it shouldn't be a surprise that it might become an issue again.

I'd like to be as close to knowing and understanding reality as is possible, and certainly don't want to be a cultist. Let's break down the example, because it doesn't seem that crazy to me.

So all the selling off, or putting into trust, businesses done by prior Presidents is for show? (Even Trump did it for his first time in office.)
This is a question - but maybe you just mean it's disingenuous? The answer to the question is clearly "yes" - it was always "for show" but I get that a lot of people have no idea what the laws are or why anyone does what they do. So maybe this phrasing is the part that is against reality? I don't know the history of this poster, so I could see this also just being someone who's misinformed.

No, Trump is doing it because he's untouchable. As long as he lets the Republicans do the Project 2025 shit they'll never impeach him. No matter what. No. Matter. What.

Trump sure seems untouchable politically, or at least I don't think any of the illegal or uncouth or whatever we want to call the unusual stuff he's been doing will get him successfully impeached. I'm not sure what he could do at this point that would make someone think the national Republicans would even try and remove him from office.

This is so fucked up.

This just seems like a rather reasonable and common opinion currently.

I would love to know who's an example anti-Trump cultist TBH, and what reality they're denying.

Irony was:

I paid for Whatsapp, a long time ago. It wasn't much but I paid to have it.

Then they changed to a free model and at no point were able to give me a refund. A bit like Slashdot... which still has a Disable Advertising button on my account that I paid to get, and that now doesn't disable advertising.

Now they're gonna load it with ads.

Part of the reason that I talk to people on Signal first and only fall back to Whatsapp if people have nothing else.

It's a chat app. One of thousands. I have no attachment to it. Making it ad-supported will just make me go elsewhere. Meta know this, they're just selling it to their... shareholders, investors? as some kind of revenue generation. It won't work.

What will happen is it will become like Facebook - where I use it to talk to people but nothing else, because scrolling the front page is basically 9,999 posts of duplicated irrelevant uselessness, and one ancient post from a friend that it decided to dig up while not showing me any of the recent posts from all my other friends on there.

Before drum n bass was a thing, dance halls were enamored of speed garage, eurolounge was all over, and raves were, well, raving, I had already made a couple of analog synthesizers, one intended for a guitar pedal chain, which got used by a vibraphone artist who scared the heck out of me.

I stumbled into electronica, not the disco-in-a-box crap, and started experimenting with all that. Splurging for a TB-303, my first 'purchased' instrument, I started sequencing and stuff. Adding in some filters and whatnot, I got with a soccer buddy and we gave some tapes to the DJ I was working with (lights and video), and they got mixed in to blend from, for instance, from BeeGees to Frankie. Ugly, but kept everyone dancing...

And I never thought of it as music. I had no training. Rhythms I hacked at until I got something that sounded right. Tempo was easy to fix. Making a bbd pitch corrector based on a Sony design cost me 3 months but fixed some analog stuff. But I was just making or using tools to make sounds. Music? Welllll....

And now I hear AI 'generated' music, and it's actually recognizable as music. As if disco with drum kits in a box and 66 key synths spewing orchestra hits was 'music'...

Well it was, and this AI music stuff is, pseudonyms and indecipherable identity not a new thing for bands, and all this is a controversy ginned up by 'artists' who resent competition. They act like poets... Or Boothbay Harbor painters. A pox on them.