Please explain to me what part of the two-word sentence “I disagree” is not you disagreeing.
No no, that’s what I said, that’s not what I meant. You misunderstood.
/s to make a point
OP clarified to you what they meant, and you disagreed with them
I disagreed with their assertion that the main text “kinda does”, I didn’t disagree with their clarification of what they meant. You can tell because I quoted precisely what I was disagreeing with.
not only is there the OG post as proof, but they also told you (in implication) that you misunderstood
I did not tell OP that I disagreed with them, you misunderstood.
/s to make a point
OP knows what they meant by what they said - you can’t tell them they don’t know what they meant
I haven’t commented on what they meant, only on what they said.
I get it that you’re having a hard time understanding how what they said, means what they said it does, but you’re allowed to accept that you misunderstood.
LOL
The main text kinda does
I disagree.
They’re asking based on their specs whether Linux will run fine for them.
The post does not ask that.
Your post doesn’t ask that.
If you have to ask someone else whether you should switch then you should not switch.
If you have to ask someone else whether you should switch then you should not switch.
Yup
What’s the name of the package? I couldn’t find anything.
Is there a client for Signal in Debian?
How can we make sure Zionists are held accountable when their genocide is over?
You can’t.
This post title is disingenuous. DeSantis doesn’t say drivers have the right to hit protesters with cars under all circumstances, only when the drivers are threatened.
If you have to ask other people whether you should be a doctor, you should not be a doctor.
usually peaceful interstellar community
Uhhh…
Giving up advancements in science and technology is stagnation.
That’s not what I’m suggesting. I’m suggesting giving up some particular, potential advancements in science and tecnology, which is a whole different kettle of fish and does not imply stagnation.
Thinking it’s a good idea to not do anything until people are fed and housed is stagnation.
Why do you think that?
stagnation
Why do you see feeding and housing everyone as stagnation?
The people who are motivated by advancing technology, aren’t motivated to overcome corruption, incline equality, to replace economic systems, etc.
That seems a bit presumptuous. Why do you think people who are motivated to advance technology aren’t motivated to overcome corruption, etc.?
All you’d be doing is stifling innovation, improvement, a reason for hope in the future
I disagree. I don’t see why focussing on feeding and housing people implies stifling innovation. And do you not see feeding and housing everyone to be an improvement and a reason for hope in the future?
We already have the resources and technology to do this
But not the will. Because people are focused on building spaceplanes instead of focused on what matters.
“your pet issue doesn’t matter because my pet issue exists”
That’s not what this is. This is more “your civil war doesn’t matter because we’re all going die”. It’s not an “issue”, “pet” or otherwise. The fact that you think of it that way is why it’s happening.
We’re all going to die, either in wars or starving to death. Within our lifetimes. Don’t you get it?
Here’s an idea: why not take care of people’s basic needs like water, food and shelter, and then build a spaceplane?
No.
I don’t understand that sentence.
Such a question hints at a lack of curiosity and wherewithall, engendering an expectation that it would be problematic for the asker to switch, both in general and based on hardware specs.
I was indicating that I was being sarcastic in order to make a point.