• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 23rd, 2023

help-circle





  • That is not accurate.

    • RedHat is the standard for high-budget American corps.
    • Rocky and similar for low-budget American orgs
    • Ubuntu Server has a large following with developers who think they don’t need sysadmins.
    • Debian Stable is more popular with European orgs that aren’t incentivized by US government contracts to go with Redhat. It is much more stable than Ubuntu, has been more reliable in its support promises than Redhat, and doesn’t suffer from the NIH syndrome that infects both.
    • Ubuntu is popular with home users
    • Debian Testing is good for workstations and personal machines that need to be a bit more current
    • Debian Unstable for people who like Debian but want to live on the bleeding edge

  • The context is that the original version of the keyboard didn’t have the q a and z keys on the right side at all. QMK and similar keyboard firmwares have features that let a key send one code when tapped and a different code when held or pressed, and even another when double tapped.

    The keyboard designer made themself a keyboard where ESC, Tab, and Shift keys were set up to send q, a, and z on a quick tap, and got so many comments on multiple videos asking how they could possibly use a keyboard missing three letters that they made another keyboard with the three cockeyed keys added on the right as a joke.


  • Favorite would be a highly customized zsh.

    fizsh (not fish) is what I actually end up using, as I can’t be bothered to copy that config around and retune it for each machine. Gives me the syntactic sugar of zsh with common default options on by default, an OK default prompt, and doesn’t break POSIX assumptions like fish. Also Installs quickly from the package manager without needing to run through the zsh setup each time - unlike oh-my-zsh. And if I still need customization, all the zsh options are still there.


  • No - it was the language that I said was transphobic, not the author. Given that there were two different word choices (“transsexual” and “perceived gender”) that reinforced each other, it seems more likely than not that they reflected the mindset of the author, but not having looked further for their other writings I was not sure. That’s why I said " transphobic language" and not “transphobic author”.



  • There’s nothing wrong with the example in and of itself, but the word “transsexual” in place of “transgender” is not generally random. It is explicitly chosen by Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) as well as by right-wing transphobes as a dog whistle to conflate gender dysphoria with drag queens and cross-dess fetishists so as to delegitimise transpeople and suggest some sort of sexual deviance. Coupled with the equivocation of “perceived” gender, motive doesn’t even have to come into it. The words themselves and the concepts they reinforce are transphobic and harmful.

    A witch hunt would have been for me to say that the author is a transphobic asshole whose writings need to be wiped from the internet - which is very far from what I actually posted, which was regret for the way the language they chose distracted from the flow of their argument by reinforcing the social stigmatization of trans people. (Edit: That was a deliberate choice on my part. Not knowing enough about the author to be sure of motives and having no desire to deep dive into their history, I decided that it was only appropriate to point out the hurtful nature of the language and not imply motive.)