Yeah that’s widely considered to be the article about it tbh

Yeah good things get popular sometimes ;) I used arch before it was cool btw

I was just pissing about and downvoted you with the understanding that you were sufficiently decent to survive a downvote without getting upset. I don’t see a reason, however, to performatively downvote that second comment and think whoever did that was unfair, so I’m giving you an upvote.

I have never sat for an autism diagnosis, I have no idea why that would be relevant

No. You are in the minority and you will be adjusted

Funnily enough my eldest is getting a laptop this Christmas. Arch Linux with a heavily locked-down environment (I’ve disabled WiFi on the non-root account, even). She’s just about to turn 7 – how old are yours?

Well time will tell won’t it, but we’re both just guessing at the end

No that’s way too paranoid. Honestly 20 years not 6 months. And by then ladybird will be viable so nbd

Maybe they just didn’t believe his version of the story and thought it a post hoc rationalisation?

deleted by creator

Intentional and gaymer

I very much doubt that the primary motivation to be the first person to walk around the world from South America to the UK is a bet. It’s … Y’know, probably more to do with being the first person to do that.

10… billion seconds ago?

I once solved Goldbach’s conjecture in only 7 lines. Mods absolutely deleted it. Reason given? Damn, if I could remember that I could remember the proof

Particularly egregious because any private replacement of a govt program is inherently a monopoly and therefore, by economic rules, almost certain to be wasteful and shite. And outcome metrics are financial rather than intentional. Yeah but ok let’s not go down this hole, we all know where we stand.

Why would you bother talking about them, I suppose. Bitching about dickheads - fun, wow, everyone loves a moan. Complimenting the capable? Dull, flat, uninteresting

deleted by creator

That’s a lot of fish

Batshit doomerism, you sound like one of those religious nuts expecting the rapture any minute. You don’t have some privileged insight into ‘how bad things are gonna get’ or whatever hypothetical revolution you’ve conjectured, yet you presume to lecture others about it. Please, tell me again about narcissism and what it consists of.

I guess you had a pretty unpleasant life so far? Not everybody’s has sucked. But I don’t think I need to form a coherent argument against 'all reproduction is inherently morally bankrupt ’ - it’s such deliberate bait that it rejects good faith discussion off-hand.

Is there a more coherent argument to be made against hyper-natalists? Yes, I think that could plausibly be upheld. But that would be a more nuanced stance. The world, despite its trajectory, is not a hellscape.

Absolutely unhinged