My rule of thumb is that sidevolving is easier than improving or degrading.
If you became a dumb conservative, you are statistically more likely to have been a dumb liberal. The problem was with you in the first place and the value you came to represent in the society as a citizen of political sway.
From a genetic point of view claims like these become ridiculous.
Christianity was a jewish cult as well as also being right next to the founding of islam. If we count the splinter groups and genetic intermingling, all these claims become just simple powerplays.
Do we know how much of the original jewish population remained jewish at all actually?
Kind of a misunderstanding. Its not "law" they lay down, its archetypes. If it is realistic it means more like it is more relatable.
Immortality and immense power is meant to give a sandbox view of the world with lowered consequences. Also the naive inheritor in case of Invincible.
In case of The Boys, Homelander embodies the establishment that is not only more powerful, but hailed as the hero of all mankind.
Thats lots of peoples vibes. You are not the hero in shining armor. You are an insurgent at best. You dont just get on a suit and start saving lives, but you have to go up aganist THE establishment and fucking prove yourself first. The very thing that is being actively hailed.
I kind of feel the opposite. Most people I know is wary of "destroying nature".
I think meh. It is just getting streamlined. We are getting for the next phase of human civilization. We are more like an organism with white blood cells and well separated and controlled compartments of bacteria filled sacks. It is bound to get more homogenous.
Higher civilization means the meaning of biodiversity will change domains.
This claim is almost as stupid as thwt israeli delegation that wore David stars to say that Jews were treated just as bad now as they were during WWII.
Where is the jewish diaspora from the rest of the Middle East then? :)
Also kind of remember a certain military operation to move Ethiopian jews to Israel before getting murdered by either some religious groups or the communists, I cant remember.
Yeah I ended up taking a peek. Literally NOTHING was compatible that I would put on a 7950x3d. It has such a miniscule headroom, not even the nh-d15s, or even some of their smaller coolers would go on it. Ended up with Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420.
I think Im starting to realize why these 10%> distros are where they are. Every time I go out to try something like OpenSUSE or Fedora it is always the same kind of issues. This 0 hour "what the hell, why cant I find a basic thing" questions that come up even well into being an advanced user.
The Debian and Arch sphere are well deserved to be having the largest share these days. I guess I made a mistake throwing off Debian every time just because I wanted something "cooler".
Thats it. That is indeed THE main issue (or ballpark of issues) of Fedora. Like it should actually be needed to get fixed to get somewhere.
I'll give you that, documentation compared to the Arch wiki is not as comprehensive; nothing's as comprehensive as the Arch wiki lol
I linked the wiki page, that does not adhere to the meaning to documentation in any way shape or form.
If i'm installing a basic Fedora desktop, i'm going to their website, downloading the default ISO, and installing the default Gnome desktop. That has xorg and wayland and display drivers and all the things you need to get it running on pretty much any hardware. If i don't want Gnome i'll use an ISO with a different desktop, still get wayland and xorg with the default install.
I installed with the netinstall image and ticked the meta group meant to be made for a collection few Window Managers you want installed. It failed to install Xorg.
If you're installing Fedora from the minimal install and then building the desktop (or window manager, maybe you use i3 or openbox) up from scratch like you would in Arch, you're going about it the wrong way. You can go this route but i'm not surprised you'd run into some issues there and have to solve for missing packages (as you would in Arch too, though the Arch Wiki is much more helpful with this type of install).
I didnt want to build it up from scratch, I was only missing Xorg that I expected to be installed. I didnt even understand why it would not be installed for a Group containing X11 based WM.
Even if we argue that it should not be built from ground up, not having any way of knowing that base-x contains all the Xorg packages means that the distro lacks basic debugging capabilities if something does go haywire. But I wont go further into this because it would be ridiculous to debate this. It was a thing on every single distro 30 years ago!
Im ready for it not being as easily managable as Arch if I want to "customize".
I didnt mean to imply it has no Arch-like documentation, I said it has NO documentation. Even wayland is arguably missing basic documentation other than a todo page and a basic short explanation.
Let me put it in perspective: You install a basic desktop. Xorg wont get installed even for a "Windows managers" group where most of the WMs are xorg based. And then I have to find how to get all the xorg packages without all the functionality that was meant to provide the needed info.
Whatever defaults or saneness it has, I just find these inexcusable faults. Im having a really hard time understanding why it would be preferred like that and I can get no answers. Neither I do for similar issues when I try something like say OpenSUSE. I kind of want to find out whether Im actually wrong.
Well its about Oppenheimer, not the nuclear bombs or the japanese.