True, but also I’ve had people telling me I have to ‘critically support’ the government of Iran, or else I’m just as guilty as if I dropped the bombs myself.

Nah, fam. I can be against two things.

Formatting?

I can fix him…

He could have just made incense too, of course. But He did this instead. Because He’s a dick

Just like buying real diamonds, the smell of burning flesh just isn’t the same without the knowledge that it’s the result of unimaginable suffering.

While we’re at it, laptops are also terrible for posture. Either the display is too low or the keyboard is too high, and as long as they’re connected, there’s no getting around that.

You’re going to need a strong, healthy back in the Mad Max hellscape that’s coming soon.

You can be critical of something and still support it

If you support any state, you’re not an anarchist.

If you support a theo-fascist state, you’re not even close to an anarchist.

I don’t have to support the state of Iran to oppose the US and Israel.

Ah, yes. Any good anarchist should support the authoritarian theocratic state that’s being attacked!

Smart. If you take out all the guards first, they won’t be able to throw you in prison for doing it.

That’s insane.

If you expect anything else from this regime, you haven’t been paying attention.

Republicans are weak-willed morons. There will be a few days of uncomfortable confusion, but they’ll be cheerleading this by next week.

After all, they never met a middle-eastern war they didn’t like.

• Killing lots of brown people.

• Unlimited money for their defense contractor buddies.

• Get to cosplay as patriotic for supporting the war effort and supporting the troops. (Words only for the troops, of course. Still cutting veteran’s healthcare budget.)

What’s not to like?

…while you still can.

That is indeed a very nice goal. But is it practically achievable?

The actions your words encourage within the west are the same that the most bloodthristy warhawks encourage.

I don’t think the bloodthirsty warhawks are encouraging the abolishment of all states, especially the ones that kill people. And, yes, especially the one I live in.

Oh come off it. I’m not defending the fucker. Just saying that a slow, gradual abolishment of slavery that started much earlier might have been an overall better outcome, with fewer people enslaved and fewer people killed over it.

Oops, shit. I was off by about an order of magnitude on the death toll. Still, though.

I’m not trying to ‘both sides’ this shit as much as I’m trying to ‘no sides’ this shit.

Because an 8GB RAM stick costs $9,000 and hard drives literally can’t be had at any price, but this shitty thin client thing is only $49.95 + $10/month subscription. ($25 per month if you want it with no fewer intrusive ads.)

Coming soon, to a dystopian AI future near you.

I’m still petty enough to hope this effort is a miserable failure

I hope this is effort is a miserable failure … because if it catches on, it could spell the end of desktop PCs in general as a consumer product.

Desktops will always exist, because you need the local processing power (and the cooling to support it) for certain professional workloads. But if everyday computing and even gaming becomes mostly done on thin clients fully dependent on internet servers, then desktops will become more and more of a niche, professional product. Which means they’ll become more expensive and harder to get. Replacement parts will become more expensive and harder to get. A desktop PC will be an expensive industrial machine, hard to justify the upfront price of for an average consumer. (Especially when a cheap thin client with a “cheap” monthly subscription can do essentially all the same things.)

It may also slow the adoption of open-source software because these thin clients are likely to be locked down and not able to install any other software without putting up a fight, if it ends up being possible at all. And if most people get used to the paradigm of renting their computing power from the cloud, they’ll be resistant to change that and go back to locally run software on their local machine that they then have to buy because their old thin client hardware can barely run anything, even if you do manage to install other software on it. (Imagine how hard it will be to convince someone to install Linux instead of using Windows if the first step of installing Linux is that they have to replace all their hardware with much bigger and more expensive hardware…)

Also, copyrights should expire in a more reasonable timeframe. Probably something around 10-20 years. (Rather than our current US absurdity of ‘Entire life of the creator +70 years’.)

But, also, there needs to be some accommodation for collaborative works, especially large-scale collaborative works with dozens or hundreds of creators contributing. (Like a big-budget movie or video game.) Trying to navigate copyright issues on something like that with only individual copyrights would be a nightmare. You need some mechanism to support group ownership of a copyright, including a way for the group to delegate certain rights and responsibilities to one individual who represents the group’s interests.

I do, however, think that only the group who actually worked on the project should be able to own that copyright. They could license it to companies for distribution, but ownership of the copyright should always remain with the creators who directly worked on it. No copyright should ever be owned by any corporation at all or by any person who didn’t contribute to the project.