that it’s an artificially engineered “crisis” by the medical industrial complex to justify modern day discrimination and refuse to provide healthcare to fat people, Black people, etc
podcast episode on this

Thanks! I’m slightly confused by the sources linked in the podcast description though. While it’s pretty US-centric they universally seem to confirm that yes, obesity rates are rising and that yes, medical consensus is that obesity is a bad thing. Does the podcast then come to some kind of different conclusion?
I don’t have a hard time believing that American companies are profiteering off of sick people, but I feel like there might be some accidental shuffling of cause and effect here. You can fleece and discriminate against a fat person, but in order for that to happen you first need a fat person, don’t you?

there’s no obesity epidemic. it’s all eugenics to the core

I’m almost afraid to ask, but what do you mean by that?

These are the people who then say that if you gain weight it is because you are lazy or weak willed.

Whether someone perceives it as hard to lose or not gain weight doesn’t really factor into it, does it? For adults the ultimate decision to eat more than one needs lies with exactly one person.

Really it is 99% hormones and only 1% strength of character.

I’m not sure I understand correctly, are you suggesting that obesity epidemics have some kind of shared underlying physiological reason?

For music, offline play is already available via Finamp. For everything else I’m personally making due with the regular Download feature that just gives yout the raw files. But then again it doesn’t really come up often, since I don’t really consume anything but audiobooks when I’m on the go.

Sorry, I misread. What is bad about the UX exactly? You don’t need to customize anything if you don’t want to; “it just works”. And I dont follow you on how having the option to customize things makes it a bad user experience. You’re assuming the native UI is bad for some reason.

Being given the tools to customize something by hand is not the same as being offered enough option to simply choose what you want. Having a good UX means that there was a UI designer who alread did the customzing for you and you simply have click a button to apply it.

It’s pretty amazing that it’s as cohesive as it is.

That’s a very good point. I’ve often wondered that myself. We may have reached peak Linux already - it’s so hard to scale up massive FOSS projects without somehow sacrificing ideals on the way.

Many things in a FOSS ecosystem will sooner or later confront you with one hard truth:

The program you’re using was not developed for you.

It was developed because the creator saw a problem and wanted to fix it. Then they made a program to fix it and stopped refining the program the moment they were content with it. Little to no consideration for other users or mass-adoption. Which is fine, they developed it, it’s their time.
But it also means that you will frequently be confronted with things that are objectively unintuitive and unreasonable from a new user’s perspective because they make sense from a developer’s perspective. The former will always be outranked by the latter, even though there will always be more users than developers. Unfortunately that’s just how it is. There are some few exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions.

I know you’re trying to sound optimistic, but that particular example required significant (worldwide, in fact) external intervention…

We don’t need to presume anything, OP can speak for themselves.

Sure they can! Until they do, there’s my helpful take for the meantime.
But don’t take my word for it, you could also piece together their intent by them thanking all the other helpful responses in this thread that happen to elaborate on legal obligations 😄

What do you mean by this?

Many things in life come with legal, moral or financial requirements and obligations. The OP presumably wishes to know whether there are any that they might not yet have considered in their situation.

i absolutely disagree. the way insurance works is you all pay into it and they use that money for claims. it’s literally our money.

Again, you do not “pay into” anything. There’s no pool or fund or growing personal account. You buy a service. There is an exchange of goods and services here. As you receive the service, the money ceases to be yours.
Whether or not other people file claims with the insurance doesn’t matter, just like it doesn’t matter whether or not the baker buys new furniture after selling bread to you. They’re not paying the furniture store with your money, they’re paying the furniture store with their own money that became theirs as soon as you relinquished it to them in exchange for the bread.

On every single professional sports game I’ve ever seen, every single show, every single channel. Isn’t this our fucking money you’re meant to give out should, god forbid, something happen?

While there’s certainly no redeeming feature to be found in the advertising industry, I feel like you might be missing the point of insurance. An insurance does not safe-keep “your” money. You pay insurance for a service, you then receive the service and your money is gone, spent, as if you had bought groceries. The service you receive is what is called “coverage” but what is more easily thought of as “immunity against bankruptcy due to X”, X being the insurance case. That’s what you buy.

Figuring out how to best allocate the money is up to the insurance - it’s their money, after all.

Unless it can natively run all the existing ready-to-go Pi images and software packages and will also receive community support when I ask for help in a Pi-adjacent forum it’s not really going to be a competitor to the Pi. The hardware is pretty much irrelevant.

what? no! licenses are how authors are deciding to grant specific permissions on their copyright.

Sure. But that does not contradict what I wrote.

that is like saying because you found a book in a library you have the choice to copy it and sell it.

That is precisely the choice one has. It’s a choice one doesn’t have when one doesn’t know the contents of the book or when they are confronted with closed-source software.

the fact that source is available does not grant any permission besides looking at it.

Yes I agree. “Making the choice” would require making it without the author’s permission.
But again, I’m not talking about permissions as I don’t really consider them to be nearly as important as availability and ability. One has the ability to modify/use code with the source and without permission one does not have the ability to modify/use code without the source and with permission.

So yes, Libre is nice, but the source-open aspect is always the most important component.

I’m getting brain damage from this thread. So many stupid people here.

2010 called, it wants its vaguebooking back 😜

But in all seriousness, if you have grievances or consider any particular piece of information that you stumble upon to be incorrect then you need to either point that out specifically or refrain from commenting - otherwise you’re actively confusing and deteriorating a conversation, that’s not good.

The source code from windows have been leaked a few times already. Try repackaging it or redistributing with modifications, see how far it will go before you get sued into oblivion.

I’m not really sure what you mean here, it has been modified and redistributed vigorously ever since its leak.

“Suing a random internet person on the other side of the world” is rarely a successful proposition. In order for that to work there would have to be incentive, jurisdiction and a lack of anonymity :P

I personally nerver really understood the whole semantics debate that always unfolds in situations like this. What does it matter if a piece of software is truly libre or how it is licensed as long as the source code is available? Respecting a license is a choice. If you have the code you can fork it. Whether it’s libre or not only influences your ability to put your real name under the fork, doesn’t it?

It absolutely is, at least from my observations!

Blacklist everything then whitelist the IPs you know you’ll be connecting from (work, cell phone, etc). I don’t connect from random places usually. If I need to then I use cellular. You might be better off with a VPN if you need to connect from random places.

I see, thanks!
Is there any concern with whitelisting a cellular CGNAT’s public IP? Presumably that would potentially whitelist thousands or tens of thousands of other mobile devices at once, wouldn’t it?

IP whitelisting

How do you do that? I understand how blocklisting would work but how does whitelisting work in practice? How can you know in advance from which IPs you will connect to your home network in the future? That just seems like a recipe for getting stranded in some hotel without a way into your network.