I think that’s called a raspberry pie, essentially.

Are they? Do they even have a linux client yet? I’d say they are second class citizens at best.

None of that makes sense.

Im sorry. What possible way is there to compete against trillion dollar companies financing every aspect of politics? You can’t play that game. And nobody is coming around to save us all. You can only reject it and rebell. That’s how change works. Has always worked. and will always work. You just don’t want it enough yet.

You are playing a rigged game and expect to win, and you say I’m rejecting reality. It’s you who needs to accept that people still have the power. And tell others. That’s how revolutions happen. From the bottom up. Always.

I don’t know. The French revolution? Hippies? Homeless communities? Revolutions have been done countless times, and they always started with no real chance to succeed.

What do you want me to say here. A plan to save the world? I have no idea where you are and what your situation is. That’s the point.

We have all the networking, but nobody connects. The world is in the best spot ever, technologically, but we use it to divide. Where are you? What’s you biggest issue? Let’s pool together and see if there is a way out?

We all divide into groups, splinter-groups and even smaller units. Especially so since about 20 years ago. We should unite. How hard can it be?

Would you try?

Or would you rather debate me, telling me it’s not possible?

I’d guess you’d pick the latter. Why is that?

I don’t know if those statistics are correct, with the ten companies and poor 90%.

If it is, your conclusion is “we have no chance in this system”

Mine is “the solution can’t be companies or politics then”

Man, the people still have the power. That’s why political systems try to separate us as best as they can. Creating diversity instead of unity. Everywhere.

If we wanted, we could change the world within a month. We just don’t want to. Because we are fed the most stupid stories and ideas, as many as possible. From diets to skin colors to countries being evil by nature.

Most of humanity are just normal people. A few million of them are megalomaniacs. And they managed to make us all believe that they run the show. But we are running it for them. :)

Gluttony and materialism, I’d say. We all could have rich and wonderful lives. A few percent of us want more. And they try to make the rest think that that’s the right thing to do for everyone, even if that’s technically impossible.

I’m pretty sure that’s the root of all evil. You are welcome.

So, not really GtaVC not really running on a router. amazingly useless, too.

After twenty years on Steam, I’ve been asked three times to participate in the survey on my gaming setup, and on three occasions I played on Windows. No survey in the last five years while using Linux. :)

I’ve got it twice on my work laptop, where I used it just for the messenger, back when I ran an active community for a game.

Not sure if I want to trust that data.

It might be edge cases. I’ve played games on proton just fine with my 1060 and now my 3070. Doom eternal, Tomb Raider, Hitman, Cities Skylines, Guild Wars 2, 7 Days to Die, a whole range of games.

My 960 didn’t work at all, and I had to dual boot windows to play any game. Most Linux distros didn’t boot, even.

I never managed to eliminate tearing though.

I’ve been using steam since Half Life 2 released and had the survey pop up twice. And both times major data-points were completely wrong. Like resolution (it apparently used my second screen) and HDD space.

That data is about as relevant as a once a lifetime epidemiologic study about diet preferences.

Exactly the point I apparently failed to make. It never worked. Yet we are holding on to it. Just with the added caveat that the weapons are now money, and the wilds are gone.

You do? I wonder how that would work. Can’t see it, personally.

Making fun for STILL using it. If our navy would navigate by the stars at night, it would be laughed at, right? And rightly so. ;)

A light form was tribalism. If you didn’t go with the flow, you were expelled. With enough expelled ones, new tribes were formed. It kinda created human diversity for a while. There was only so much room on the river, so at some point more elaborate systems emerged. And the people with the biggest huts made those rules. Rules were made so that they could keep those huts. Extremely simplified.

We now don’t have places to banish people to. That’s why the cry for housing is emerging. Someone took the wild away. They should provide an alternative. I believe that’s the whole idea behind wanting the rich to pay. For some reason they were allowed to own everything. Often for centuries.

It makes little sense to people today. How was anyone allowed to walk somewhere, stake a claim, and own it forever? Even defending it with lethal force? Why aren’t we anymore?

Well, it takes some time to grow up to be able to find food and water. How long until we can walk even?

Food, water and means to provide an upbringing until offspring can care for themselves, those could be considered basic rights.

Housing is so far into the technological advancements, building up on so many other systems, I fail to see how that can be a right.

Air and food on the other hand, and sensible means to acquiring those. Well. There certainly is room for discussion. When people start owning land, keeping others to effectively do those things, they should have to provide alternatives. Or we have to abolish ownership of natural resources at all. Both can’t work together. That’s ineffective, of course, and makes planning and advancement difficult.

The price of capitalism and ownership of nature should be compensation. Nothing natural about social structures. If they want to continue those money games, they need to play by the rules of nature. Or they’ll go down with chopped-off heads at some point.

Absolutely. So instead of building up on that, declaring everyone may own something, making them mini billionaires in principle; yeah, make owning land illegal. That would be the natural conclusion.

You are basically saying: other people owning things and keeping me from building a house and a live should be illegal. Your solution: Make everyone own something, so they can build a house! Houses for everyone, hurray! But hey, my family is twice as big as yours, my house should, by right, be bigger. And hey, my farm supplies for ten families, it should, by right, be bigger. You don’t want to farm, let me buy your land and provide for you. And so the circle begins.

I’d say, that thinking is what got us here in the first place.

I haven’t read up on official human rights. Who made them? Did someone bother to ask most humans?

This is a Sunday-morning coffee post, not a detailed world-view. Feel free to ask, but refrain from shooting things down. It’s not like I’ve spent hours on this.

How are they defined, human rights? I’d say anyone in my way to spread my genes keeps me from being a human.

As a pragmatist, I’d say breathing and eating, and perhaps warmth and caring are human rights. We can’t do any of them on our own after being born, and without them some really crappy humans emerge. Breathing should be top tier. Anyone disturbing that should be under heavy focus. Can’t do anything without air.

After that, once we are fairly independent, doing things to keep people keeping me from growing up and procreating should be my right.

Killing someone else would keep them from doing that, so not being killed by other humans seems like one. Killing others would disqualify me from being human, and I would give up my rights by that act. Straightforward stuff.

Mix in social structures, and it becomes complicated.

Being homeless? Build a commune somewhere. Why insist on being near that techno-tribe with internet. It’s nothing but a tribe, has nothing to do with survival or being human. Having modern amenities can’t be a right. Other humans invented them at some point.

Which leads to something no human should have a right to: owning land. Because owning land keeps humans from realizing their purpose and keeps them from being free to be human.

Housing is a right? That’s ridiculous. That’s a technological achievement from other people. So is monetary wealth. How can those be a right. If nobody came along inventing them, nobody would have them. Can’t be a right. At all. That is just the consequences of capitalism and ownership of natural resources.