I've found revanced to stop playing the video after a minute or two unless you frequently update it (which is a manual process)... I no longer listen to lectures while I run errands, because there's now no convenient way to do it. Ads are out of the question, and finding a video I want to watch only to have it cut out as I get on the road has killed the experience for me
I'm on Android, and open to suggestions
That's not the problem... The problem is Linux isn't "normal". Their work laptop comes with Windows or osx. Their home computer comes with the same.
Now go tell the average person to install Linux... To them, you might as well be telling them to open up their computer and snip a jumper to make their computer faster. To them, you're telling them to take their working computer and do something they don't really understand and is beyond their ability to undo.
It's an aftermarket modification to them. If you want to make Linux approachable, it's really damn simple. Hand them a computer running Linux, with a pretty desktop manager, and a GUI for everything you expect them to do with it. Better yet, add an app store so they can try out software and run updates without feeling intimidated
My point is, if manufacturers start selling Linux machines again, a lot of people will get on board
People aren't opposed to learning, they're just scared of breaking it, and they need to at least be able to use a web browser without going up a learning curve
Yes, most definitely. Dry and tasteless are not words I associate with falafel, it sounds like something went horribly wrong there
The base taste is pretty mild, like a baked potato, but then you add spices and eat it along with other things
Yep, it's pretty amazing how much not destroying the environment helps it recover... although the closer we get to a collapse, the more that ability to bounce back diminishes
Literally every aspect of our world is in a balance... Everything wears down over time, so the current state is basically a homeostasis between biological, geological, and astrological forces. The problem is that humans act on a far shorter time scale - 100 humans could cut down trees faster than a forest can regrow, 8 billion can change the atmospheric composition in a decade or two
I can. By making it technically possible, you can divert attention.
One example would be for crazy edge situations. Like letting children with terminal illnesses fulfill their last wishes, or letting hormone ridden teens make their case to a judge, keeping them from more extreme actions.
But more practically, I think this is a great idea... 99.9% of anyone asking for this either needs court ordered mental evaluation and/or a referral to CPS to do a deep dig into the situation. By making it technically possible, that means anyone seriously pursuing this has to explain themselves to a judge.
Unfortunately our judicial system has a lot more to do with money than justice (so most people who would actually go through with this probably have the money to protect themselves from consequences), but this law would be a sensible part of a more perfect system... Granted this should almost never be granted by the court (terminally ill child is the only situation that makes sense to me), but there's value in it
My opinion would change greatly if this is a real path to child marriage rather than a mostly theoretical possibility
It's checks and balances, not rock paper scissors
His power here is to set a direction and to nominate new appointees. He could write a bill to expand the bench and/or a constitutional amendment to require a code of ethics... Hell, he could even say "ok supreme Court, you say you can self-regulate... Publish your own code of conduct publicly or I'll lead the charge in imposing one on you"
Presidents have a lot of soft power. He can write executive orders to demand the problem be evaluated, or he can use his platform to rally support... He can even go to Thomas privately and suggest he resign with dignity while he can, even try to bluff him off the bench
There's a lot he could do - his hard power over the supreme Court is very limited, but soft power is how most everything works
I think I've got it! So on install, we make a checkbox that says:
What's the conflict? They have to make you believe they care about you, they don't actually have any built in interest in your well being
Some have a strong sense of ethics, but those ethics are the only thing from them being a complete shill
It boggles my mind how you can get away with a self-defense defense even when you entirely created the situation
Zimmerman is a great example to me... He brought the gun, he stalked an unarmed kid minding his own business, and he confronted him up close and personal. If Treyvon Martin had gotten the gun and shot Zimmerman instead, he'd have a way stronger self-defense case (in principle at least)
Like I could understand avoiding a murder charge, but shouldn't it be manslaughter at least? At best according to the one side of the story we have, Zimmerman was negligent to the point someone died. If he didn't bring the gun, it's doubtful anyone would have died. If he left it to the police, no one would have died. If he kept his distance or tailed him in a car, no one would even have been at risk.
Our laws are seriously wonky in this country...
It all comes down to "well, sure we might have plenty, but if not for capitalism how could we decide how to divide it?"
But any solution has to promote self-interest as a virtue and can't take things away from people who currently own them, and also must conform to a bunch of myths we have about "how the world works"