I’ve noticed a pattern in distrohopping among my linux using friends. Many started with ubuntu back in the day, then switched to a less preconfigured distro like arch, gentoo, etc. You learn a lot being forced to tinker and fix things. But after that, many seem to have landed on distros of the debian or fedora kind, because they want to get actual work done and you can make any distro do almost anything anyway.

Florpty hoondee floon is actually pronounced “För hundra gubbar, Borg spelar redan för Sverige, nu blir det bullfest hela dagen.”

I don’t know about morality, but my view is that it’s part of the deal with free software: users can do what they want with it. If you willingly make your software free, that’s what you signed up for. In return, the devs have no obligations to listen to users or do anything they don’t want. If they only want to fix bugs in the flatpak, fine, that’s their choice. It’s their software, we’re all free to work on or use it as we want.

If you’re into Computer Modern, almost all modern tech variants (not Knuths original) are too light in print. If you look at his printed books from back in the day the letters are thicker. It’s just a consequence of using one technology instead of the printing tech the font was designed for. Same thing (but more extreme) happened to Centaur btw.
Check out the pictures of CM here: https://www.levien.com/type/cmr/gain.html

It’s rare nowadays to see someone admit a mistake. We should all do it more.

how does it compare to k&r (2nd ed.)?

A bold claim. RHEL updates are mostly security patches, are they doing that due to lack of resources too? Is it that hard to imagine that enterprise distros don’t want surprises from changing functionality?

Theory: alcohol inhibits the otherwise natural blocking of earth spinning induced motion sickness. If you drink enough, you can feel the world spinning and lose balance.

The word “stable” usually means unchanging through a release. I.e. functionality of one release is the same if you stay in that release even if you update (security and bug fixes mostly). The experience of the system not doing anything unexpected like crashing is reliability. A rolling distro is by that definition not stable, but it can be more or less bug free and crash free.

In sweden we have lots of äss.

To me the issue is the people calling a system stable because it is reliable, even if it updates unpredictably to changing functionality.

Do you use your computer for things that rely on specific library versions and functionality?

Plan9 would have some opinions about that.

Vi and later editors added a lot of commands, but if you want to keep the spirit of ed(1) and bring it into a visual context, I’d say sam(1) is the true successor. It’s what Ken Thompson used after ed, and Brian Kernighan. There are some people who at least are interested in ed today, this book is good for example: https://www.tiltedwindmillpress.com/product/ed/

It comes with both fvwm and cwm, and you can install all the usual ones or a full desktop environment. Personally I like cwm in the minimalist end and xfce for more of a full desktop, but it’s all just preferences. Which one do you like in Linux?

OpenBSD is surprisingly good as a desktop, as long as you don’t need something that needs shoehorning in or some fancy filesystem. But if you use it as intended, it’s good. Like, there’s no linux compatibility, no proprietary nvidia drivers, etc. You probably want to switch away from the default window manager though unless you think perfection was reached in the early 90s.

Iirc, micronutrients and HIV prevention, followed by preventing malaria. The idea is that we spend a little money now, to make many people grow up and be healthy, which avoids big costs to societies while at the same time generating people who can contribute more to the same societies. Many people want to solve the climate first, but it’s very expensive for very little return. In an ideal world we would solve all the problems, but… we don’t. So if we have limited resources, we should spend it where it does most long-term good. It’s not a bad idea to do good things for the climate, but if we have to choose between things to do, it gives little benefit per dollar compared to other things.

There is a danish researcher called Björn Lomborg who has been researching this type of question a lot. He tends to get a lot of hate because the most cost efficient ways to spend money to do good isn’t what people want it to be.

I work in palliative care, and if she was in pain and you gave her morphine according to prescription, you did the right thing.

This is why my preferred way of communicating is to sit in darkness and construct one-time pad ciphers which I then put in a new safe that I don’t have the combination to unlock and is welded shut and dropped into the ocean. But other than that I like to use grapheneOS and matrix. I can’t be sure it’s 100% private, but I am 100% sure that facebook isn’t private, so I’d rather use matrix.