Maoo [none/use name]

It’s the audio framework behind most modern Linux systems nowadays. It performs much better than previous ones and provides greater consistency and expectations for end users. Basically… if you’ve ever been frustrated by audio configuration on Linux, this project is probably working on fixing it.

Most people (that can get away with it) basically just check out after lunch. In a 9-5 job the majority of work happens in the window of 10-12.

It’s easy to say that all one wants about someone they’re talking to if no second opinion is granted or if ignoring all the other replies, so I’ll take someone else’s word for it. You don’t come across as a semanticist.

1. Deflection.

2. Incomprehensible.

If only I was referring to that.

It’s what you said don’t blame me

I did, semi-anonymous upvotes and downvotes (whose unreliability is ironically consistent enough it can be relied upon and aren’t even particularly plentiful in this case but also which can be seen in the modlog) don’t change my statement about replies and repliers.

It means I’m not the only one with my sentiment (your claim) and that people think your comments are bad. This is obvious. Your primary tactic in disagreement is to refuse to even try to understand very simple things or look for some pointless technicality. This is a dishonest thing to do, you know.

Also, the fact I’m accused of being a lib while also being accused of being right winged suggests this is about dislike for me somehow and not an actual point.

You should learn to ask questions when you don’t understand something, as you seem to be unfamiliar with the vast majority of things that you want to have an opinion on. Calling you liberal and subscribing to right wing end reactionary talking points is entirely consistent, you just don’t know what I mean by liberal. Let’s see if you can figure out how to acquire this information!

…as opposed to?

This makes no sense. What is your point or question?

I’m sorry, I meant metaculture (happy?).

Suuuuuure you did. 10 comments deep trying to do a little dance and you’d like to revise your claim to an esoteric term used by like 200 people on the planet and where is entirely opaque if not oxymoronic in how it would even apply to all of the things you’ve said.

A simpler explanation: you don’t handle being wrong very well.

I couldn’t tell based on your comments bringing it up.

Glad we sorted it out then

Then why ask?

The quote you’re responding to literally says why. More feigned incompetence.

You implied it was.

Please don’t lie. Lying is bad.

You’re reading too much into the simple act of someone pointing a finger.

It’s just the same thing over and over again. Lying and deflecting. Pointless little quips. Incomprehensible statements from a confused mind.

Racist conflation is not “the simple act of someone pointing a finger”, but your behavior in claiming it is as good a reason as any to give up on you as being a pathological liar with no capacity to self-criticize or even go through the motions of a conversation.

Because this has become so repetitive and the blocking point is your bad faith behavior, I’ll just dismiss you and stop replying. May you someday have the courage of your convictions and until then shut your trap.

Unless, of course, I believed I already addressed them, and my answers I did provide in my previous reply were paraphrasings of things I already said.

We’ve now entered the pathological lying portion of coping with contradiction. You didn’t answer several of those questions in any form and made confused passes at a couple out of order.

Kinda proves my point, doesn’t it? You leave the interpreting to me and wonder why you get misinterpreted after I ask you to elaborate.

Uh yeah you do have to interpret questions in order to answer them that’s how the game of question-answer works.

You say that like there is no instant access to the many other replies I’ve gotten on this thread. You’re the only one here with the objection you imply you have. The only one.

Wrong. Check out those upvote ratios, lib.

“Everyone already knows you perceive danger from Islam” is false, again the other replies are readable, […]

There is no contradiction even though you’re acting like there is one.

Again, proving my point I moments ago mentioned you proved.

Your point where you feign incompetence to avoid answering a question?

I’m guessing this is personal for you. Yeah, I chose this moment, because this kind of thing is currently more vivid on peoples’ minds.

Whoosh

To think I merely gave Islamic culture as an example (…)

You have still failed to internalize that there is no such thing as singular Islamic culture. You’re doing the racist thing right here and now. You can’t help yourself.

Israel and Palestine are both somewhat guilty (…)

Oh, I don’t care about your ignorant opinions on Israel and Palestine.

in-groups =/= cultures =/= countries

?

Must I? I’m trying not to generalize. Especially ethnicity. Are you asking me to?

I was calling attention to the fact that Islam is multi-ethnic and global in contrast to your lazy and racist statements.

So in other words you set up a trap and I avoided it? I’m not understanding.

I suppose you would think that challenging your false assumptions is some kind of trap, lol.

This isn’t about race. I’m not against any race. To say I am is… kinda generalizing. Culture is not race. Hawaii is an Asian-majority state, does that make it less Hawaiian culture than it was generations before? Aspects of peoples’ biology is just not on my mind in any part of this.

And yet you conflated islamic culture and being vaguely middle eastern. Of course you’re being racist. Only someone who has no idea how race is socially constructed could disagree.

Race has never been about biology btw.

The whole point of not generalizing […]

I am describing what you’ve done, you just don’t like the characterization.

Yes, I have read hundreds of works on this, enough that I can engage in conversations such as my tweet here and all the replies it’s replying to, so no need to attack me with the remark that I must not for personal sake.

“I have read hundreds of works on this” is weirdly not an answer to my question and makes me wonder what the “yes” means. If you are claiming to have read the Quran and the Hadith, as in all of it, I don’t believe you. You have demonstrated nothing but ignorance of Islam and incuriosity.

Who knows what that tweet is supposed to demonstrate.

[A strange set of seemingly random statements about the Quran and Hadith]

Cool this jives with my position that you’ve exclusively read other people’s opinions.

Tolerance has varied in Palestine and surrounding countries throughout history, but in every point in history, they’ve always had at least a few people who they downplay,

Who is “they”? What does it mean that they downplayed a few people? None of this makes sense.

yet even the fact that any point in a group’s history has systemic homicide […]

None of this makes any sense. It is not coherent thoughts.

Also, not sure if you’re trying to imply they’re not in the Ummah, but I should point out Southeast Asia is in the same sphere of influence.

A sphere of influence has an influencer, which is required to understand the claim, but you don’t list one.

They, though, have been far, far better about how to treat minorities and only someone who is generalizing wouldn’t give them an honorable mention.

Except you did generalize and in fact keep doing it over and over again. You can’t rhetoric your past and current statements out of existence.

Then it’s a good thing I didn’t do that, now isn’t it?

Except you did.

Put me on record as pointing out you’re the very first person to bring politics into this. In the words of almost every Democratic candidate in the past two decades, human rights are not a political issue.

1. This post and thread is inherently political. Impressive that you don’t understand that.

2. Why should I respect the opinion of Democratic candidates?

3. Human rights are 100% political. In fact, the term itself is used in an exclusively political way. Have you ever noticed how only non-Western-aligned countries are the only ones described as violating human rights?

I asked you in the reply of mine after the one where I cued you.

I will help you understand what asking is. If it doesn’t have a question mark, you didn’t ask for it.

Case in point. You call it a meaningless distinction, but in practice it’s generalization. I had seen the post before and googled it to get it again, that’s why the post you saw is the one you got.

Generalization is not inherently bad and is in fact necessary for someone to learn anything. Learning things like what kind of person thinks Sam Harris isn’t an embarrassment and uses his subreddit as a source.

A generalization is bad when it’s reactionary and dehumanizing, like being racist.

If done intentionally, putting words in someone’s mouth regarding their views is what someone does when they have nothing they can say in response to their actual words.

Did I make up the fact that you cited the Sam Harris subreddit? You know, the subreddit dedicated to the infamous islamophobe? The “skeptic” who uses the same language you do? Folks that jump at the chance to identify a perceived logical fallacy?

Your replies where you assume my whole political ideology

I haven’t mentioned your political ideology. I would wager that it is incoherent and immature. But you are embedded in a reactionary and islamophobic subculture somewhere, one in the orbit of self-proclaimed skeptics or rationalists.

culture

Not difficult to guess given what people worry about a vague conglomeration of Muslims coming to their country and making things dangerous.

[my] race, religion

Nope haven’t said anything about those

intentions

Easy to interpret from your caginess and use of multiple racist and xenophobic tropes.

would certainly suggest you think you do, but I have more proof to the contrary. Both in the form of my ability to speak for myself and links to me talking about my past viewed.

These are not in contradiction with what I said.

Which makes it exactly how you describe strawmen in your definition.

Except it’s not because the things I’m criticizing are the things you’re actually writing down right here on the internet.

You think you know who I am? Prove it, with evidence (not just your word about my word versus my word about my word). I’ve been debating for a decade and a half, surely you can find evidence.

No thanks. Don’t care and I already have enough info for my personal satisfaction.

I’m just letting you know that this is all unoriginal and I’m already very familiar with it, right down to the obsessive sophistry to avoid admitting any kind of error whatsoever.

Or you can acknowledge that, as I say again, that the OP is simply about cultures versus cults (in general).

Nah I’ll stick with the truth.

The comment you’re replying to with that statement implies I thought I addressed everything, and when you objected to that, I asked if you could point to where you believe I hadn’t.

I just did that again it’s the whole first paragraph that was basically just questions. And you never asked, you just made assertions.

PS I shouldn’t need to do that because you are perfectly capable of going back, finding questions, and rethinking whether you addressed them.

If it’s dishonest to ask someone to give examples, I would doubt you think anyone on this thread is honest.

Is that what I’m saying is dishonest?

What is the relevance of what you think would happen to you in an Islamic country?

The relevance is in the character. People see “true” cults with negative connotations. (…)

Right you’re not getting the question. It’s intended to make you question at a deeper level why you’re asking the question in the first place, a question that builds on islamophobia tropes that are common in the sources you’ve cited. Everyone already knows you’re thinking about comparing cults and Islam. Everyone already knows you perceive danger from Islam. I’m trying to prompt you to question why you chose this example in particular given that it is a trope among racists.

I’d also point out that Islam is not a monolith and Muslims are not a monolith, despite your implications, so which Islamic countries are you thinking of?

I didn’t list them all, but I did give an area, and I did imply Palestine as it falls under the umbrella of current events.

You waved vaguely towards the Middle East albeit without actually directly answering my question. So no, you didn’t answer that question, which was clearly asking you to concretize your veiled statements.

But okay, what comes to mind for you is Palestine. Nobody is surprised that you chose this moment to share denigrating opinions towards the people of Palestine. Again, I’m not stupid, but you are being cagey.

Do you see how my descriptions of racist islamophobia and its purveyors are relevant? An entire population is facing occupation and genocide and your first thoughts are about how to be afraid of and denigrate them, supposedly due to their culture and religion, and conflating them with the entirety of Islam (hmmm lumping very different cultures and ethnicities together to dismiss them over fears, I wonder what that is).

I don’t have an exact visual map of all Islamic countries, but my point didn’t require it, it does not need to specify which countries whether or not it claims all the countries over there are susceptible to it (and it doesn’t), because it pertains to the cultures and the groups harbored by them. The point, again, is that cults have a better track record than those groups.

Doubling down to say “I don’t need to distinguish Islamic countries” is an interesting choice.

See my paragraph above.

Your paragraph above doesn’t really answer the yes or no question. Seems like it might be no? Who knows, you are afraid to speak plainly.

Nothing in particular. That was never a factor in what I was implying. I don’t have a set idea on that.

You have no mental image of the people you fear would oppress you if you lived there? You don’t know what people vaguely in the middle east (apparently what you’re referring to) look like?

Anyways this question was intended to make you confront the cultural and ethnic diversity you were glossing over by lumping all of Islam together and you didn’t answer it in any way earlier.

The Quran, which has my death warrant inscribed within it. If they’re not out to kill/imprison me, thank God, but it also means the Quran’s definition of what it considers Islam has been reduced.

Another question that was intended for you to think a little more deeply (and you didn’t answer before).

Your entire understanding of Islam in the middle east is just that they all believe the Quran? The generous interpretation is that you know there’s diversity and this is the commonality, but I think we both know that’s not what you’re thinking, especially given your comment about what’s in it.

Have you actually read the Quran? The Hadith? The history of tolerance in Palestine and surrounding countries? The origins of fundamentalism that I mentioned in my earlier responses? (These are rhetorical, you obviously don’t and are not curious).

See my paragraph above.

So, islamophobia?

See my paragraph four lines ago. Generalization would require someone say all of a group is like the most stereotypical people in said group.

Wrong. You just have to generalize by, say, ignorantly lumping all Islamic countries together to make a false claim. Though you certainly are leaning on right wing stereotypes of Muslims.

So saying “for every question you say hasn’t been answered, I can point to (or quote) a part of what I said that does exactly that” isn’t a cue for you to do, well, exactly that?

Yeah you don’t seem to understand what asking means. Are you confused about that all the time or only when contradicted?

Citing a post in a subreddit referred to as r/samharris isn’t the same as citing the actual Sam Harris, so that confusion was on you.

I was hoping you’d try to make that meaningless distinction. You think I don’t know why you use that source? lol

Such pseudo-groups occur all the time on Reddit. Neither does it imply everything in it is going to be created in malice. So that’s a strawman, as have been much of the responses I’ve gotten.

Yessss I was hoping for an erroneous reference to a logical fallacy. Surprised it didn’t come up earlier. I know your type very well, lol.

Don’t worry I’ll give you a free lesson anyways. A straw man argument is where you intentionally set up a position you claim your opponent holds (even though they don’t) just because it’s easier to knock down than their actual position. On the contrary, I’ve been trying to get your cagey butt to acknowledge what you’ve been hinting at and criticizing the positions I know are behind them. This is because you aren’t fooling anyone with your veiled and general references, there are real humans here that know what islamophobic, chsuvinist “skeptic” grifters say and do and have actually had to spend time defending their communities from the braying racism you’re trying to both show and hide.

Critical support for lemmy.world admins alienating their users by managing to be more fascist than Reddit admins.

Suppose for a moment I sincerely believe I addressed everything (and I do). Saying out of disagreement “review it yourself” would thus be a request I cannot humor,

Oh, so you are incapable of listening to others and doubting yourself when they disagree with you? Yes, I agree, that’s the real issue here.

Anyways maybe you’ll drop this dishonest pretense if I point out that my first paragraph was nearly all questions you did not answer:

“What is the relevance of what you think would happen to you in an Islamic country? I’d also point out that Islam is not a monolith and Muslims are not a monolith, despite your implications, so which Islamic countries are you thinking of? Are you sure you didn’t have a particular idea in mind when you conflated “islamic country” with the scenario you are thinking of? What do the people there look like? What do they believe? What would they do to you?”

At most you said it was not your intention to generalize, but (1) that still doesn’t answer my questions and (2) yes you absolutely did that repeatedly, it’s literally the premise of your post and these replies. You are, of course, aware of this, you’re just handling contradiction poorly.

If you’d like a tip: you always have the option of just not responding. It’s a lot better than what you’ve been doing.

that’s why I invited you to give examples.

You didn’t ask for examples lol

I also don’t know who this Sam Harris guy is, so I’m not sure why you say I cited him, but I even did a CTRL+F trick to make sure. I still don’t see it.

You cited his subreddit and your poorly-veiled, cagey focus is drawn from the islamophobia he pushes out. Maybe you’re so confused that you don’t even know where you picked up this garbage, but as I explained in my original response, that’s where these grifters come from.

Be better.

You did all of the things I listed and ignored most of my questions. If you honestly believe otherwise, I invite you to revisit what was said and asked and ask yourself whether you acknowledged it at all, let alone actually addressed what was said.

Though I’m not stupid, I know what defensive behavior and fibbing looks like by someone that is uncomfortable. I’m not going to be polite if you try this again.

I invite you to answer the questions I asked and consider much greater violences at hand. I didn’t make you cite Sam Harris or conflate Islamic countries or buy into right wing xenophobic fear narratives, but I did respond to them.

What is the relevance of what you think would happen to you in an Islamic country? I’d also point out that Islam is not a monolith and Muslims are not a monolith, despite your implications, so which Islamic countries are you thinking of? Are you sure you didn’t have a particular idea in mind when you conflated “islamic country” with the scenario you are thinking of? What do the people there look like? What do they believe? What would they do to you?

Where is “here”? Why are “they” going to where you are? Almost certainly, uou will find that the point of xenophobia is to distract you from what was done in your name to the people forced to immigrate to your area. To excuse the much greater violence and turn your fears and frustrations against a population that you and your culture stripped of their homes and safety - and then justifies through dehumanization and a focus on Islam as the problem.

You will indeed find some immigrants that are reactionary. Imagine a world in which social developments could occur within countries through legitimate struggles rather than forcing deprivation and murder on people from different cultures and then whinging about how they don’t think how you do.

In short, you’re doing the exact problematic thing that Sam Harris serves a function for. You’re identifying an enemy to fear and degrade and it’s blinding you to the much greater dangers and violences that are directly involved but where blame lies in your country and your culture. Centuries of colonialism premised on ethnic cleansing and extraction, now neocolonialism doing the same. Go look at where Wahhabism and the other forms of Islam you are scared of came from. They are recent inventions arising from occupations, not intrinsic aspects of Islam.

And review the reactionary aspects of your own culture, as you are fearing hypothetical harms by people coming from countries that your country and culture actively participates in destroying. The only question would be whether that country is a very active player in imperialism or a hanger-on.

As others have said, these are lines to make it possible to guess where a specific house number might be based on the start and end numbers of the line.

I usually recommend against deleting this kind of thing unless you can confirm that locals don’t care or if it’s not present in surrounding blocks.

Cults exercise very direct and personal control from the deified leadership to the followers. It tends to mean abuse between central leadership and the followers. Cult practices have similarities to religions and draw from religious and spiritual claims (and can become religions), but are distinguished by certain patterns of how they control members:

• Isolate from those around you, especially family and friends that don’t agree with what you’re doing.

• Recruit others to the cult.

• Demonstrate value to the cult through humiliation and serving the petty needs of the leader. The petty needs will be described as being much more important than they really are.

• Harsh punishment and violence for stepping out of line.

• A culture of blaming followers for their sins, including things for which they are not in any way responsible or at fault.

• A hierarchy of power that is mostly about who gets to mete out abuse.

• A specialized set of terminology for common things so that they become an in-reference that offers will not understand.

• Isolation of “troublemakers” or people that fight back. Keeping them separate from one another.

The small size of the cult makes these things have a qualitatively different impact when it comes to social control. It’s not about some established mysticism or conservatism that you carry out some action or feel some guilt, it’s a distinct practice where every person around you forces conformity based on the whims of a very personal power structure and just a couple people who get to decide everything, and you usually live with them.

Anyways, the main issue with Westerners criticizing Islam or Muslims is that the discourse is absolutely saturated with racism and Western chauvinism that is just a more veiled version of what white supremacists say. It’s not particularly informed and, as part of the dominant hegemonic mindset of the oppressor class and oppressor nations, it gladly ignores that the most extreme, voluminous, and unnecessary violence is carried out by the power structures they implicitly or explicitly support, secular or not.

Some Western criticisms of Islam tend to present themselves as academic or at least thoughtful and informed examinations of theology and cultural practices. Sometimes they even take a critical look at other religions and cultural practices. But they very often lead to lazy and bigoted policy and advocacy positions because it’s less about understanding in order to improve the world and more about identifying an enemy and it turns out that the global movers and shakers would absolutely love to use those “principled” stances to justify the domination and destruction of entire countries and peoples with your consent.

You’ll notice that Sam Harris has become a full-blown islamophobe and neocon. He is not improving the world through knowledge or action, but justifying oppression by the global hegemonic powers that want to pillage for profit by playing on stereotypical racist fears. He’s also gone down the self-help grifter path. He’s really just laundering reactionary views through a distinct language of “skepticism”, views that would fit right in at a “race science” consortium in 1912 and a bloodthirsty US State Department meeting on how to justify the genocide of brown people in the Middle East.

Ubuntu is highly commercialized and trademarked so vendors that offer it make deals with canonical. Dell, Lenovo, and System76 have all offered Ubuntu in the past.

One thing that vendors do sometimes is they offer an official image that includes drivers for that particular laptop and they never make it into mainline. I think that’s part of the draw for offering your own weird OS - you basically get to control hardware support and your own release cycle.

Control has other benefits as well. You get to do some branding, which bean counters love, so you get to deliver “the Lenovo experience” or whatever. I think System76 actually cared about this for good reasons and that’s why Pop!OS (terrible name) is actually pretty good. Ubuntu kept screwing up their offering so they just did their own thing instead.

Cult behavior

Oh I see. Not sure what they mean by “pay once”, that was what made me think it was about buying software.

Brave has been hyped as a privacy browser despite having several major privacy failures baked into it repeatedly. It’s 100% hype. You get the same level of privacy on paper by installing Chromium with an ad blocker and tweaking a couple settings. Firefox has better privacy defaults and is better with an ad blocker installed. Chromium has a slight edge on security (FF needs to really push tab isolation harder) but if privacy is your main concern I would always recommend FF.

Money is involved because people want to make a living off of their project. Also, every major browser has been backed with huge amounts of funding because supporting a browser is very difficult.

That said, that doesn’t mean every browser project is good, either. Just that it’s reasonable to see why people would want to get income from their work.

PS the Brave CEO sucks so I’m not sympathizing with him here.

Crypto is the dumbest hill to die on.

It’s tens of thousands of unregistered securities hype bubbles built on half-baked tech. There is nothing of value there.

And Brave is just Chromium with a faux privacy mask.

You are not immune to propaganda

It’s inflames the cognitive dissonance of ethnostare supporters