Why not? Everyone's using it on their steamdeck with no problems. Outdated attitude. If you're not technically competent you shouldn't use windows because it's harder to use than linux or mac.
"If you're not technically competent you shouldn't use windows because it's harder to use than linux or mac".
Harder but easier and less challenging. The distinction I would make is for users who are comfortable interpreting the command line and those who aren't. That comfort level is what should dictate the user's decision to opt for linux vs windows/mac.
(PS: IMO, mac power use often requires the CLI, but macOS has built-in some guardrails to prevent noob users from completely messing up the system. Linux has no such guardrails).
It's much easier to us the command line on unix-likes than on windows, but it's not really a necessity. I know linux users who say they never use the terminal because they don't want to, and they're doing just fine.
Have you guys even used linux in the recent years? Sure it's a bit janky sometimes but so is windows and only getting worse. You can get quite far with linux by using graphical package management apps only, and now with steam you can even install games as easily as on windows.
Linux is way easier and more intuitive to use even for a novice than windows. I don't get why people think windows is somehow easy to use.
> The distinction I would make is for users who are comfortable interpreting the command line and those who aren't.
The use of the command line stopped being mandatory years ago. Everything that an average user is likely to do can be done though the GUI, just like other OSes.
Taxing the workers and giving the money to the 'poor' is an indirect subsidy to the dragons. Dragons are rich and cunning enough to afford to 'plan' their taxes, so it's not like they need to contribute to the UBI. They just reap the benefits.
The German UBI experiment we're discussing didn't involve 'taxing workers to give to the poor' - it gave unconditional payments to people across economic backgrounds, most of whom continued working.
Your assertion about tax planning misses that proper UBI implementation would include tax reform to ensure the wealthy can't avoid contributing. If anything it demonstrates your clear understanding of whom would actually be taxed to achieve the funding for such social programs. The dragons.
More importantly, the data shows UBI recipients spent money locally on necessities and small businesses, not funneling it to large corporations. The 'indirect subsidy' theory contradicts spending patterns observed in UBI trials.
Well, all I can say that if I was a major shareholder of Volkswagen I'd be 100% in support of UBI and made sure everyone can afford a new car, not just a used one.
It's a poor analogy. Dragons take the gold from the people and kept it from them so it can't be used.
The 200 billion that Bezos is assumed to be "worth" is currently in the hands of the people, being used by us. If we wanted to fix society instead of buying amazon shares we could do it today. Bezos hasn't "hoarded" it, we have it.
"To the dismay of Thorin, Smaug the horrible turned out to sit on a pile of paper that anyone could buy if they wanted to and all the gold was already in circulation in the town of Bree."
If the taxes are landing just on "the workers" then that sounds like a poorly designed tax system, not a problem with UBI. Replace UBI with anything (roads, defense, welfare) and it is the same problem.
I thought the whole point was to give it as cringy name as possible to discourage people from using AI and instead learn to program properly. It was called prompt engineering before but I suppose it didn't sound discouraging enough.
The US aren't trying to buy Greenland as they haven't made any offers (as far as we know). They did make an actual offer in 1946, though, and that apparently didn't sour relations...
Trump's way seems to involve a lot of bluster so seeing through it, what are they trying to do, really?
Apparently there has been a surge in pro-independence parties in the latest elections in Greenland, perhaps that is a clue.
A side note is that Denmark hasn't been very strategic. They let Greenland leave the EC/EU, they let them self-govern... this is a path to losing it altogether.
> A part of Denmark is quite a euphemism for Denmark subjugating a people that want to be independent, that Denmark has no right to.
1) The locals have just as vehemently rejected being part of the USA.
2) It's not a euphemism, that's just how "country" works as a concept in international law. See also: "Catalonia is part of Spain", "Navajo Nation is part of the USA", and "Canada became a country on July 1st, 1867"
> The locals have just as vehemently rejected being part of the USA.
My comment did not mention the US. The key point is that Greenlanders don’t want to be slaves to Denmark. It’s a euphemism because your comment - and Danes and the EU in general - don’t seem to recognize that colonialism is alive and well in Denmark’s relationship with Greenland. That’s why virtually all the political parties in Greenland support independence.
As for this euphemism:
> China isn't trying to buy Greenland
This is just a euphemism to justify the lack of any concern over European economic ties with the authoritarian dictatorship that rules China. If Europe wants to divorce from the US due to its principles, they should first have no business ties with China whatsoever. This thing about Greenland is not even remotely a justification for continued support of the CCP.
It’s the US that is divorcing from Europe, not the other way around. The US has seemingly decided to betray Western civilisation and become just another barbaric shithole like Russia and Iran.
Hmm, as it happens there have just been general elections in Greenland [1]. Share of vote of parties that support independence: Pretty much 90%, with big gains for the party that advocates a "more rapid independence", and "favors greater cooperation with the United States". So perhaps Trump's bluster has produced effects... If perhaps not what Denmark would like.
The party gaining most this election has a stance of "remaining within the Danish Realm for the foreseeable future, with independence as the end goal of a gradual process that starts with increased self-determination".
Yes, the party that came first and gained a lot is pro-independence.
The party that came second and gained a lot, too, is also pro-independence but more rapid with better relations with the US, as mentioned, so it seems that Trump's bluster has influenced things but perhaps not the way Denmark would like to...
When the debate effectively shifts from "should we become independent" to "how quickly should we achieve independence" (i.e. not "if" but "how") then I'd say that it's going well for the US and badly for Denmark, despite the European news coeverage.
Sometimes I feel like the economy never recovered from the 2008 financial crisis. I got gut punched into the adulthood by the financial crisis and at that time there was a lot of talk about the japanese lost decade. My first thought back then was "so this is going to be our lost decade huh". I'm good now but I can't say I had a lot of fun in my 20s.
reply