Kalashnikov

Tanning is incredibly dangerous. It is literally burning your skin, destroying DNA in the process. It can give you skin cancer and ages your skin faster. It's a bad idea. I don't know how "skin-whitening", which is the first I'm hearing of this, works, but I wouldn't imagine it has no health disadvantages.

I have no idea why anyone would want to change the color of their skin. It is literally a completely meaningless property. It makes no difference whatsoever. The idea that one might want to is uncomfortable to me.

I did not join Lemmygrad to be linked to Occupied Korean propaganda media. What the fuck is this.

You are a tankie. OP is a tankie. Everyone I don't like is a tankie. Tankie was the OG Hamas before it was cool to accuse everyone of being Hamas

Funding on the other hand, does indeed equal an amount of control. The Linux foundation consistently develops and invests in things that mirror the interests of their fund sources. They fund crypto projects ffs.

Linus for example, strongly rejected GPLv3 even though it was a vastly superior version compared to GPLv2. He even rejected the concept of Tivoization, which is insane. GPLv3 would have hurt companies more and helped user freedoms.

The Linux Foundation is not where you should send your donations to - you should instead send your donations to the Free Software Foundation (FSF), which actually stands for user freedoms.

The Linux kernel also includes, by default, proprietary blobs that have been added there, and these infringe upon user rights.

All of these companies that fund Linux development make lots of money from Linux, and that's why they fund Linux. Even as desktop Linux is sometimes a competitor to Microsoft Windows, Microslop makes way more money from their enterprise software which runs on Linux, so does Amazon.

And because Linux is GPL, they cannot just take the code and spin their own version and sell it to customers without also making the code GPL, so they necessarily have to contribute to the Linux kernel if they want to also use it. They are forced to make it better, they are forced to pay up.

In cases where the project does not use a GPL license, (for example, FreeBSD, which uses the BSD license), companies just rip them off. An example is Sony, whose playstations run FreeBSD based operating systems, but Sony rarely ever contributes or funds FreeBSD development in return. This is because the BSD license allows them to take the code and make it proprietary and sell it for money themselves. With GPL, this would be illegal.

The Linux foundation barely develops the Linux kernel anymore. Most of their money goes to side projects, some AI there, some crypto here.

Besides, Linux is just the kernel. The operating system is you run is in face, the GNU operating system with the Linux kernel under the hood. GNU tools and licenses are developed and maintained by the FSF, which is not, by any means, funded by big tech.

Because these big tech companies make hardware, their support is needed in maintaining the Linux kernel (which is ultimately, a software package that contains code that can interface with hardware).

Ultimately, you are running GNU. Linux is just a marriage of convenience. If Linux development starts being guided by Big Tech against the interests of the user, then it would be trivially easy to switch over to another kernel, or even a fork of Linux.

Very little pay, very long, expensive training and very long hours. The shortage has meant that more people have been given more hours to work, which drains them, and many of them go into early retirement, which worsens the shortage and so on.

This is also the case with Air traffic controllers as well. And even doctors. America is crumbling from within.

So the Chinese did nothing, and won. You don't say!

It is equally unlikely Russia would risk WW3 over Cuba.

Russia cannot meaningfully compete against American naval dominance in the Caribbean. Their navy has been in decline for so long. Russia is incapable of projecting power in Cuba. Even the Soviets were - they couldn't and didn't attempt to break the blockade during the Cuban missile crisis.

Only a small portion of Russian naval vessels are capable of traversing the Atlantic without refueling to Cuba in the first place. They no longer have carrier strike groups as the Soviets did. Their submarine fleet has also diminished considerably, and what's left is needed elsewhere for the very important task of maintaining nuclear deterrence and cannot be spared. Submarines are also not offensive instruments. If a submarine makes its presence known, it is a sitting duck.

If the US decides to attack Russian escorts to Cuba, then that is reason for the warmongerers at NATO to active article 5 and attack Russia on land. And Russia is not going to win naval battles either - the offensive capabilities of the US Navy are unmatched (perhaps except by China, due to their extensive collection of anti ship missiles, but they only work near China)

Windows File Explorer is the best in terms of features, most Linux File managers lack basic functionality

This is a very, very interesting take. I have seen nobody with this opinion in my life before