If you’re talking about what he’s accused of saying, he did not say that. People kept repeating a badly garbled version of what he said that makes him sound awful, even though his actual words are easy to find and completely disprove the accusations.
Yeah I read this article, or his comment about how it’s only natural for adult to be attracted to adolescents. I was more interested by @lolcatnip answer. But as a billionaire, he could buy tons of feet cheese.
“The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, ‘prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia’ also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally–but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.”
RMS on June 28th, 2003
"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. "
RMS on June 5th, 2006
"There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That’s not willing participation, it’s imposed participation, a different issue. "
I have a standing theory that once a person is no longer concerned about their welfare or the welfare of their descendants, they go crazy.
Like, once you reach a point where survival is no longer a problem, that part of your brain goes nuts. It’s not a flawless theory, since philanthropy is a thing and people like Dean Kamen exist, but it’s a thing that seems to happen an awful lot.
I think it’s more that billionaires have very few people to surround themselves with except for sycophants and other billionaires.
Nobody says no to them, everything they’ve ever done was the right thing according to everyone around them, so why should the next thing they do or say be wrong?
Covid really really accelerated the craziness among them.
Survival no longer is a problem to literally everyone in north america. yeah people die, but, when was the last time you have heard of anyone who is not anorexic starving to death? People still talk like survival is an issue, but that’s because they actually mean not being comfortable.
This is simply not true. Starvation isn’t the only thing that kills people - they die of easily treatable medical issues all the time because of lack of health insurance. Unhoused people die of exposure every summer and winter.
I mean i tried to make it painfully obvious I wasn’t talking about medical conditions, car accidents, or crackheads being stupid, but i guess i had to come back and spell it out.
You’re missing the point. The risk might not be very high on average, but if you don’t want to end up on the streets, regular people still have to kind of function inside the system somehow and continuously work for regular income. The will to survive is part of what drives them to do so.
Billionaires on the other hand, wouldn’t even have to lift a finger to be able to live comfortably for the rest of their lives. On the contrary, they’d have to try really hard to get rid of all that wealth. Major fuck-ps and intentional money burning excluded, the chance that they end up having trouble getting their basic needs fulfilled is miniscule. THAT is the difference.
I’ve worked for several very, very rich men. The pattern I notice is that they always get surrounded by people who make sure that they never, ever hear “no”.
Imagine living in a world where every inane thing that comes out of your mouth, somebody immediately makes it their mission to try and make it happen. You no longer get any kind of useful feedback from the world and your opportunities to learn from feedback are greatly reduced.
I agree, I think in the end, it does make them crazy.
I’m sorry but arch is a terrible choice for a first Linux OS: it breaks often, and has problems updating it if you don’t update regularly, (stuff only Linux Nerds overlook when advising an OS).
It doesn’t break often, it doesn’t have problems updating it you don’t update regularly.
It might be a bad choice for a first-time Linux user due to the heavy setup process/time post-install, but as a gaming platform it works absolutely fine. Steam Deck runs on Arch ffs, come on now. 😄
Curious: when was the last time you used Arch? Seems like you haven’t used it of late, considering those misconceptions you spewed. Or maybe you are running experimental/unsupported stuff?
I’ve used it for over a decade now and had less problems with it than with Ubuntu that I ran for much less time before Arch.
Let me try to reply to your somewhat heated rebuttal, Last I used arch (that was manjaro 4years ago; endeavorOS 3 years ago) so yes quite a while back I confess, I encountered multiple issues updating some of these listed below:
As I updated sporadically around once every 1-4 months with little time to spare for system maintenance and the prime requirement It Just Works™️ running Steam, in both cases eventually it didn’t cut it for me.
I only recently learned that updating without being subscribed to their newsletter is not recommended, none of the YouTubers or Arch enthusiasts I’ve come across warn about this.
wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenanceRead before upgrading the system Before upgrading, users are expected to visit the Arch Linux home page to check the latest news, or alternatively subscribe to the RSS feed or the arch-announce mailing list. When updates require out-of-the-ordinary user intervention (more than what can be handled simply by following the instructions given by pacman), an appropriate news post will be made.
I don’t know what kind of issues Manjaro or Endeavor have had, probably plenty, but I’m running vanilla Arch for over a decade as I said, no issues. I update once a week maybe. I take a look at the packages that will be updated, and I do as the wiki said – check the website for big news/manual intervention. Sometimes there’s manual intervention, but they almost never concern me because it’s due to something I don’t have installed. This is standard routine for Arch, and if you don’t pay attention then you are not using Arch properly. (I don’t pay attention most of the time either, honestly, but it still doesn’t break.)
I also use Nvidia and Steam (Flatpak) and it works great and I’m very satisfied. Works better than my Windows installation actually; better performance.
Arch being an unstable mess is a misconception these days since a long time, I think. It’s been great.
I’ve updated old laptops with Arch that have been sitting for years without updates. I just run -Syu and it basically replaces every single package 😅, then I reboot into a fresh, working system. 👍 All good. Happened plenty of times.
No he didn’t. He made atx and worked closely with the guy who make markdown. He also was part of the group that made RSS and contributed to the early CC.
linuxmemes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.