pms (u/pms) - Readit News

pms commented on The United States withdraws from UNESCO state.gov/releases/office... · Posted by u/layer8

aprilthird2021 · 2 months ago

Egypt had only one elected head of state, who was anti-Israel, and he has since died in prison overthrown by an autocrat who sides with the US and Israel and does their bidding. Also, at this moment, Israel controls that border completely, and they have vetoed hostage deals that would require relinquishing that control.

But you of course didn't answer anything else I said, despite being wrong about the one thing you picked out of my response

pms · a month ago

> But you of course didn't answer anything else I said, despite being wrong about the one thing you picked out of my response

Exactly. This only exposes the lack of accountability and the harmful stereotypes that led Nazi Germany and now lead Israel to committing a genocide.

pms commented on Linux Reaches 5% Desktop Market Share in USA ostechnix.com/linux-reach... · Posted by u/marcodiego

throwawaylaptop · 2 months ago

Because it's an important distinction. If all PC sales fall to almost zero, and only the most hardcore tech nerds keep using them, and use Linux like they've been doing for two decades now, did Linux really win the battle or did the entire war evaporate and they are some long lost leftover soldier in the jungle fighting some battle no one else even is anymore.

pms · 2 months ago

If an OS is used, then that's because people need it, not because they're fighting some imaginary fight in the jungle. It's their preferred OS. If the number of people using computers shrinks, because non-pro users move to mobiles, while the fraction of pros using Linux increases to 95%, or even 50%, I think that's a very clear win for Linux.

The reason why MacOS grew in popularity is because it started to be used by pros, myself included, i.e., I've switched from Linux to MacOS seeing many top computer scientists using MacOS. However, after over 10 years of using MacOS, I'm actually still not sure whether it was worth it, and I'm considering to go back to Linux since a few years. The main reasons stopping me from switching is a reliable Calendar app and concerns about battery life.

pms commented on Linux Reaches 5% Desktop Market Share in USA ostechnix.com/linux-reach... · Posted by u/marcodiego

nerdjon · 2 months ago

I have to wonder how much of this is people switching to Linux vs the larger trend of people not having traditional computers to begin with.

Outside of gamers, I don't know anyone that has a computer at home that is not their work laptop if they have one. At least in my circle everyone I know has moved to their general computing being on phones and tablets which is not captured here. So is a solid chunk of this the people that would have already had Linux desktops continuing to have theirs since they would likely be the same people (more technical, needing to do tasks not possible on phones and tablets) less likely to be making that switch.

Basically if the higher percent is due to less desktops overall instead of a major uptick in Linux desktops, it is not really much to celebrate.

Given these numbers are percents I would be very curious.

Now yes there is a clear uptick thanks to the Steam Deck (however with Microsoft pushing their optimized for gaming Windows it will be interesting to see if that continues or goes backwards). But I would be reluctant to call that Linux Desktop anymore than I would call Android an uptick for Linux.

pms · 2 months ago

Why is this is a top comment? Market share is a relative measure. Even if there is a drop in the number of personal computers, still it's an achievement that the drop didn't affect Linux, while it affected other platforms.

> Basically if the higher percent is due to less desktops overall instead of a major uptick in Linux desktops, it is not really much to celebrate.

I disagree. Imagine that Linux became the OS used on 95% of personal computers. According to your reasoning there wouldn't be much to celebrate. Says who?

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

SllX · 3 months ago

As long as you’ve got humans in the mix, it’ll also be political. What you’re describing is a political organization and wishcasting that it’ll be as neutral as you envision according your values of neutrality. It’ll also be the most powerful political and military organization on Earth, so in other words, same shit as we have now, different letterhead. You may as well be describing America, you just don’t want it to be America, and I can respect that perspective even if I don’t agree with it, but your hypothetical organization is not as different as you think it is.

pms · 3 months ago

It's 100% different. The institution I envision should represent all countries, or at least member countries, so that it has global democratic legitimacy. Simply put, interests of one country are not equivalent to interests of all countries. If one country tries to take the role of that institution, sooner or later it will run into a conflict of interests.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

SllX · 3 months ago

What you are proposing is not a change, it's still might makes right. You're just changing the letterhead.

pms · 3 months ago

No. What I'm proposing is to make these processes purposefully and explicitly neutral, accountable, and just. This implies democratic and decentralised governance and decision-making. Clearly this isn't happening now.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

andsoitis · 3 months ago

what do you think could be a first step that moves us in that direction?

pms · 3 months ago

In a reasonable world, the first step would be reforming NATO so that it becomes more neutral and focused on preventing wars rather than countering Russia. I'm saying this as a Pole, so definitely this isn't self-serving, since Poles are second most hated by Russians after Ukraine. This step should, however, happen in parallel with the EU developing its European army, to defend itself from Russia if that's needed, which is another challenging and non-obvious step, but we're closer to this now than we were before Trump.

However, we don't live in a reasonable world, so I suspect the first step will be, as much as I don't want it, World War III.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

SllX · 3 months ago

> As challenging as it sounds, we need to develop a strong impartial international institution whose the only mission would be maintaining peace and preventing wars on the planet.

The scenario you concocted here is Disneyland. It’s not just challenging, it’s just an oppressive version of the UN, but it won’t be impartial because it will be the most powerful organization on the planet and a target for every extremist and ideologue that seeks to acquire power. You haven’t changed the game, you’ve temporarily changed the battlefield.

pms · 3 months ago

You can ridicule this idea, but we're already having the US (partly through NATO) taking the role of a global sherif, except without aiming for neutrality, accountability, nor justice, so we end up living in a geopolitical world in which "might makes right". If we continue like this, we will have another World War, but learning by mistakes is sometimes the only realistic way forward.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

mrtksn · 3 months ago

Let’s hope that the destruction of facilities comes with the regime change in Iran. otherwise it may have just given a brief pause and further escalation.

If the regime survives, now Iranian people have a very good reasons to ignore its shortcomings and tyranny and Do a proper sacrifice. It’s a natural resources rich nation of 90 million people. If they want to get serious, they can get serious.

pms · 3 months ago

How do you imagine Iran giving up? If anything, it will radicalize. This would happen even if you did anything remotely similar to your kid (i.e., attacked the kid violently because of an accusation they did something wrong), not to mention to a state that revolted against US political manipulation 45 years ago.

I'm wondering whether Trump knows that Iran won't give up and nevertheless pushes forward, or does he really believe that Iran can surrender? I think that's 99.99999% wrong belief. It feels like he is expressing it only to cover up his actions. He probably knows this will lead to a long-term escalation, but thinks that's the right thing to do for the interests of groups/countries he cares about.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

SllX · 3 months ago

There is no justice nor glory to be had in nuclear weapons, but they exist, and need to be contained to as few entities that can use them as possible. Like seriously, the ideal number of nuclear warheads in the world is 0, but that is not the world we were born into.

So I've made peace with mafia boss power politics keeping the number of countries with nuclear weapons on the low end of the spectrum, and for that matter I'd support a much more aggressive approach to that end than we have seen these last 30 years.

pms · 3 months ago

I don't think that's sustainable, because it leads to injustice, i.e., countries with nuclear weapons abusing their power, which in the end encourages all countries to get nuclear weapons to protect their own safety and interests.

As challenging as it sounds, we need to develop a strong impartial international institution whose the only mission would be maintaining peace and preventing wars on the planet. This should be the only entity that's approved to have nuclear weapons.

pms commented on U.S. bombs Iranian nuclear sites bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckg3r... · Posted by u/mattcollins

JohnBooty · 3 months ago

I don't know that it's the best or fairest situation, but I do know I like it better than "every country is allowed to have nukes."

pms · 3 months ago

I don't think that's sustainable, because it leads to injustice, i.e., countries with nuclear weapons abusing their position. As challenging as it sounds, we need to develop a strong impartial international institution whose the only mission is to maintain peace and prevent large-scale conflict on the planet. This should be the only entity that is approved to have nuclear weapons.