Consent doesnt mean agree in this context tho. And it is debatable whether using is consenting. Do I consent to all the shady shit Microsoft was pulling when I install windows? (Looking at the number of debloaters and their received support from community, that seems like a no)

And yet it seems to me only GNOME has this problem, and it has been there since Torvalds still publicly executing everyone in mailing list. XFCE, LXQT, hell, even KDE only has minimal complain about unexpected behavior. It seems to me that in a concerted effort to predict as much user behavior as possible, GNOME created this non existent "average user" that conforms to no one, and created this mess on their own.

Also, we are mostly against nonconsensual, non-explicit, or opt-out type of feedback. As far as I concern, efforts to point out to GNOME devs their faults are many to the point its a meme. It is also, not unrelatedly, a meme that GNOME denies these complaints because "the average users wouldn't get it") . I think it should be clear enough by now.

Actual winblows

In theory 599 looks a lot less than 600 subconsciously iirc.

But Linux is good at backward compatibility tho. Linus Torvalds leadership made sure that very few if at all any changes to the kernel will break existing userland. This means that if you have a program with their needed dependencies in the right version (which is easy with docker/flatpak/appimage) your programs will run flawlessly even if they are from the 90s.

In the grand scheme of things I guess it is not. The problem is that statement is infalsifiable, like the Last Thursdayism theory. Therefore, it falls into more of philosophical space, where Occam's Razor would eliminate this because the alternative requires less assumption. It isn't wrong, it just requires much more assumptions to be correct in order to work.

Genuinely, I have only seen mentioning of Arch as the distro they use because they mentioned something arch-specific (e.g pacman) or its actually important to make a distinction (package name), and usually they anticipate the meme anyways because its the butt of the joke now. For me at least it isnt hard to find an equivalent ubuntu/fedora/suse comment, and I think its fine! But why are we fighting this ghost of "Arch is only for edgy guys that want to break their system and be smug about it on the Internet"?

Could also be im tired of seeing this meme everyday now... Linux has a lot more jokes than this guys... Just dig Linus Torvalds' mailing list for some ideas

Thats incorrect too, the real answer is that its undefined. Infinity only is the correct answer if you only examine it from the positive side, so limit of a/x as x goes to 0 is infinity, but if x starts out as negative, the answer would be negative infitnity, causing a logical paradox.

Archlinux.org They will post if theres anything requires manual intervention

I alias it to fuck to remind me of the appropriate reaction