I subscribed to releases! Good work so far!

You can disable it to install stuff if you want.

Check out VanillaOS. I think it’s pretty neat. Their webpage doesn’t really get into the benefits as much as I think they should, but a very quick summary is that it leverages distrobox and some custom package manager to allow you to seamlessly install and run packages from other distros. It’s also kind of an immutable OS (but not really). It lets you pick which types of apps you want during the install (snaps, fltapak, AppImage, etc)

I am not super in the loop about why people are so against snaps, but I don’t like the centralized nature of them, and if that’s also the general concern, then flatpak should be fine, since it’s decentralized.

I saw a couple youtube videos about VanillaOS; I could certainly find you one of them if you want to know more.

Is this really where you are talking about?

One of us doesn’t know what socialism is, and I want to be very clear here that it might be me.

I am under the impression that socialism is about the government owning industry, not having a robust social safety net. Though, from that link you provided, Norway happens to be an exception in the Nordic model, and actualy does own some industries. So I guess we’re both right? haha

It’s funny because I almost left that out.

I’m pretty sure that Norway is capitalistic, just like America. The difference is mostly a matter of degree, not category. I definitely could be mistaken, though.

Well, I really doubt anyone is being serious in this entire thread but the parameters were simply that it was something one person could do (inferred), and that it wasn’t illegal.

I think my solution meets those requirements.

At the risk of making the OP’s problem worse: https://www.visittromso.no/ for the curious.

Considering some of their comments, doesn’t seem likely to be right wing. Most of their complaints are anti-capitalism in nature. The rest of your reply is certainly plausible.

A quick scan of the OP’s history suggests that they live in Norway, but I don’t know if that tells us anything about what a “small town” is. Nor do we know why the town is popular. It’s at least plausible that tourists stay in that small town because there are so many places to stay, and it’s close to some area that is the real reason the tourists are there. (like a mountain to ski on, or something).

I doubt the OP expects a real answer, because they didn’t provide enough information.

Run for mayor (or local equivalent), win, and then push for/implement a bunch of rules that make the town inhospitable to tourists.

I assume the tourism brings in money to the local community, yeah? Cutting off that income will probably mean you won’t be able to win the next subsequent election, so act fast.

My wife had a guy start at her company the same day she did, but he got fired that same day because for reasons no one understands he decided it would be wise to make his Teams (or whatever they used. Slack? I can’t remember) profile picture a meme that said “Epstein didn’t kill himself” or something to that effect.

It was a six figure software engineering job, too. I cannot imagine losing a job like that for such a silly, self-inflicted reason.

No, not exactly. It’s more like “a service isn’t held responsible for what users do with it”. If an analogy is helpful, imagine charging the phone company because two people arranged a bank robbery over the phone. That’s what section 230 prevents. (It’s more complicated than I’m making it but for our purposes the complications aren’t pertinent.)

LW was in no danger at all, assuming that if they were contacted about copyright violations, they react in a sane way, by taking down the offending content.

The whole

Well the radio silence on it sure seems like they’re circling the wagons to protect an admin that clearly isn’t emotionally mature enough to be in such a position.

Please don’t misunderstand. Even the government (US, in my case) doesn’t have unrestricted free speech, and that’s a good thing. We agree here. I even would say that the line as it is currently set in America is “too broad” and that we need to tweak it down a bit. We fail to acknowledge that stochastic terrorism is a thing, in our speech laws, and it essentially makes it completely legal to do as long as you remain sufficiently coded/vague.

If you don’t mind humoring me one more time, feel free to weigh in on my questions, again, but assuming the quotes were both made in context; that is to say, JFK quote for a scenario where peaceful revolution was being restricted, and four boxes (which, in my mind, comes a little too close to the line) in a scenario where people were losing their ability to weigh in on their government actions via speech, voting, and juries.

I can’t seem to articulate, even to myself, why the JFK quote is generally (in my mind) considered non-violent, but the four boxes one (again, in my mind) is more threatening. I’m hoping random internet polling will lead to some insight. haha

You are indeed very wise, fuckfuckmyfuckingass.

I only commented so I could type out your username haha.

I might end up leaving-- more for the ban stuff than the blocking piracy stuff-- but that’s wholly beside the point when it comes to whether copyright law works like people are suggesting. It doesn’t. The LW admins aren’t going to be unexpectedly served papers for a lawsuit. They’re going to get a boilerplate email with information on a claim of copyright infringement and they’re going to remove the content without question and that will be the end of it.

Like I said, “just leave if you don’t like it” has nothing to do with the point I’m making.

They’re unbanning them from a sitewide ban and then immediately banning them from the lemmyworld community.

Do you think discussing piracy is illegal?