I've never once had any viruses or malware on any linux box, ever in nearly 20 years of using linux.

I'm currently using ubuntu, security updates are generally given very quickly after the problems are discovered - much faster than windows or mac os.

I'm not familiar with windows 10, so things may have changed. But for most of the past 15 years I'd say that - as long as you use a mainstream distro on supported hardware - linux systems are less trouble than windows systems.

Of course, if you get unsupported hardware, or a poor distro, there will be problems.

If you are thinking of getting new hardware, I would recommend a 2015 Chromebook. They are easier and more trouble free than anything else out there. (And, you can run ubuntu in a chroot on most of them!)

This doesn't speak to the two options presented, these are just my thoughts because I'm also looking for a laptop:

I heard the latest Skylake chips from Intel are really a boon for battery life - if battery life is a concern.

If you want to future proof your laptop, you might wait just a few more months and get a good deal on one with a few Type C ports.

Is it actually chicken?

I have the impression (anecdotally) that most black people dislike Carson, but I could be wrong cause I've not seen any real data.

I have conversations with these folks on a regular basis. Not *specifically* the people behind this specific campaign, but other members of their ideological tribe.

It is an absolute lie when they represent themselves as merely trying to help people be more considerate and kind to others. Some of them, maybe, but many others are part of a grass roots campaign that makes Orwell's 1984 seem tame. They wield immense social power in the under-25 group, and they control language in order to control thought.

The only reason they aren't demanding these words be outright banned is because they know there would be greater backlash if they did. Instead, they are starting smaller.

I have a feeling that there are some steps being left out in the article.

If you trace things back far enough, _everything_ we eat was once poop, it's just been changed by the cycles of life.

Probably they are just trying to shorten the cycle. Rather than use poop as fertilizer for plants which we eat, they are using it as fertilizer for bacteria which somebody then eats.

I'm might be okay with it as long as there is some serious sterilization happening in between, and rigorous safety testing. Even eating meat from the grocery store brings small amounts of fecal bacteria into your kitchen.

Edit:

I need to read more closely, if the article is right then I was wrong:

"After isolating those proteins in the lab..."

This could imply that they not only separated the bacteria from the rest of the poop, but they actually broken the bacteria completely apart and separated out the non-protein - extracting only the protein, which was then used to synthesize in the next step.

I mean, this is really far removed from being poop. Its a derivative of the protein extract of some of the bacteria in the poop.

I'm a bit angry about this topic because I believe strongly in human rights, and in some ways some trans people have been oppressed; but some of the trans activists just way go too far.

Just like with feminism and anti-racism, the basic ideas are absolutely morally righteous, but then some people go down these weird rabbit holes in their belief systems.

For example - as you say about labelling 'male' and 'female' - some trans activists are so irrational that they actually freak out over someone using the biologically correct terms 'male' and 'female' in a medical/biological context.

I agree that the 'born that way' claim is over exaggerated - some people act as if their upbringing, early sexual experiences, personal choices, etc have NOTHING to do with any nuance of their sexual preference...

...but I think the scientific/medical evidence is actually quite strong that there are prenatal factors that *influence* sexual orientation. That much is not really controversial.

Yeah, 'intersex' is as much a social construct as 'man' or 'woman'.

I don't get these transgender activists. I think most of them are going about it all wrong.

They insist (and I agree) that 'man' and 'woman' are 'social constructs' (as opposed to the biological reality of male/penis/XY and female/vagina/XX)...

... but then they go on to make a really big deal about how some females are "really men in reality". If 'man' is a social construct, then no one is a 'man' in a 'reality'. You are a 'person with a penis and XY chromosomes' in reality, and a 'man' only because you and others have decided you are.

You can't have it both ways. If gender is fluid and a social construct, then most transgender people are just getting caught up in the same social constructs the rest of us are - many more so!

If we want to be more fair to intersex people, I think its better to move away from stereotypes and too much attachment to gender signifiers. If penis-born people want to wear dresses or make up, I don't care. But when penis-born people say "I'm a woman! See, I'm wearing a dress and make up!" they are really just *strengthening* the power of gender as a social construct.

No, it tells you how little protection they USED to get, THIRTY YEARS ago.


Things have changed in the US, dramatically, especially for the younger generation.

In many universities, the pendulum has swung so far in the other direction they skipped right past justice. Now, men's lives can be ruined by unsubstantiated and unlikely accusations of rape, without due process, and the 3rd wave 'feminists' (apologies to true feminists/equal rights proponents out there) will cheer.


Edit: Also, keep in mind that Cosby was an incredibly powerful person. This is a gender issue, but its not *only* a gender issue. These women were not just victimized because they were women and he a man, but also because he specifically had great financial and social power and they did not.

Honestly, that sounds to me like damage control after the fact... but maybe it is true.

Seems like maybe this judge took personal offense at some things, and might not have been interested in a reasonable compromise.

Like so many ideologically motivated movements, there is a 'reasonable' branch and a 'whack job' branch of the movement. With 'black lives matter', the whack jobs have stolen the mic.

In Oakland, they are even protesting the shooting of armed aggressors!

Was this offer rejected by the opposite side, or by the judge? It sounded to me like the judge was being needlessly heavy handed. I honestly don't know if such certificates would be equally valid, or if she would be properly executing her duties under that kind of compromise.

Anything that brings more Muslim-raised and Christian-raised people into better community and fellowship seems like a good thing to me. Maybe their shared humanity can help them overcome the 'hatred towards others' which is taught by both religions.

I respect this woman's desire to stand up for her convictions, but she should have just quit. I wouldn't work at a meat factory where they butcher animals, and she shouldn't work for the clerk's office where she is required to give licenses for gay marriages. Leaving her job is the only legal (and imo honorable) way for her to stay true to her convictions.

Retrofitting bathrooms is expensive.

Architects, building code legislators, contractors, etc should just start planning now for the future political clout of our new SJW overlords.

I don't know the solution, but some kind of new approach to 'gender neutral bathrooms' are going to become politically necessary.

Maybe it could be as simple as providing more 'single use bathrooms' and making them genderless.