No, it’s not just about DRM, currently the storefronts do not guarantee continued access to the content.
For example, Valve can just close your Steam account at their discretion and you would no longer be able to log in or download any of your games
TIL you can kill processes straight from top
One of the big things they taught us in history lessons was how he came across very charismatic and that he was good at winning people over.
It’s really important for people to understand and learn in order to not repeat the mistakes of populism, evil people don’t generally go around shouting about how evil they are.
90s kids will eventually be the last to claim it for a long time
The cynic in me says maybe your coworker was just taking their time
Yeah just tried it again now.
I deleted the partition again first, then when I got to the installer, it had created a new 50GB partition and mounted /var/crash and /var/log which can’t be unmounted (tried force unmount and all that jazz)
I recently tried this for the first time for my grandad on an old dying laptop of his which was struggling to run at any speed.
During the install it had already messed with the hard drive partitions in order to run the live environment, which is a big no-no for me.
The whole point of the live environment is it shouldn’t change the system until you try to install!
It also meant I no longer had a free partition to install to anymore so I couldn’t even get through the installer since I also couldn’t resize etc. because the partition was in use.
Been using Debian/Ubuntu based Linux for about 20 years and never seen this issue until Pop! OS
They both seem to like the name Aiden for some reason
“It’s 2024! Why are people still trying to classify nuts? Just use some expensive cloud solution that doesn’t really solve your problem”
They probably didn’t forget it but it’s not preventing you from asking about random stuff
It says right in your first link that it doesn’t support self signed certs
I Object to your terrible pun
No
You say it’s not immeasurable but then all of the things you go on to describe are within the known universe, we can’t possibly know or measure what’s outside of it, because it is not known by definition.
I’m not asking for negative proofs in fact I haven’t asked for proof of anything, I’m not sure where you got that from. I’ve simply stated that we can’t draw statistics about things for which we have no evidence - which you now seem to be agreeing with.
I said you were making a different argument because you originally talked about existing religions which isn’t what my comment or the original comment was about, I stand by that - nothing of what you had said was relevant to my response.
You can’t possibly know that it’s over 99% unlikely that the universe isn’t a simulation or that it wasn’t created by some entity since we don’t yet have evidence pertaining to any hypothesis for how it was created. The statistic was pulled out of the air and has no scientific basis.
Do I think the universe is a giant Boltzmann brain or was created by an omniscient God? No, I don’t, but it’s still pointless to pretend it’s something we can have any certainty about.
Not to be rude but this conversation isn’t going anywhere, whether you don’t understand or just don’t agree, whatever I guess…
I understand your point and I feel like maybe I’m sounding a little argumentative. Sorry let me try to be more clear.
I understand your argument is that genetic evidence disproves existing religious beliefs that people have but that’s a different argument to the point I was making.
Even if all global religions are incorrect, that doesn’t mean that a god or gods couldn’t hypothetically exist and my point is that there is no demonstrative proof of that either way.
If you check the original comment again, the question was about whether “a god(s) exist” and up until they mentioned the 99% that I was disputing, religion didn’t even come into it.
You could disprove every creationist claim, every anti-evolution argument, and you’d be right, but you can’t settle the question of “whether a supernatural being exists” because there simply isn’t a way to do that within the natural realm that we know of.
It isn’t just about God either. The simulation and Boltzmann brain hypotheses are similarly immeasurable
We’re not talking about creationism or any particular brand of theism
It sounds like you’re referring specifically to Christian theology but the comment was just about whether a god or gods exist in general
Agree with most of what you said except the “over 99% likely to be false”.
Like you mentioned it’s not possible to prove either way so it isn’t meaningful to describe it as likely or unlikely. We have no way of knowing (at least currently) so the likelihood is simply undefined
That’s ridiculous, quoting harassment is in no way itself harassment. That would undo just about every awareness campaign ever.
I like to think that he knows