I’m in the lucky position that I always could work with Linux. I was working with people that couldn’t be bothered to run Windows on their Desktops (administering mostly Linux Servers anyway). In my first job we had a “Standardized” Fedora desktop that was actually attached to our AD so you could log in at any desktop with your domain user. However we did have internal tools and some software requirement that only were available on Linux meaning everyone in our department had a Windows VM for using those tools (kinda overkill but ok). My last job we didn’t have any standard other than the system had to be encrypted and had Eset installed other than that we could set it up he was we liked.

Could I work with a Windows desktop? Sure I’m on the Terminal sshing into systems 98% of the time anyway but at the end of the day I love to simply be on Linux having a workflow I’m used to.

Regarding Office I was just using Office online for anything that needed it.

Getting Linux Systems into AD is possible (but of course requires cooperation on the side of the IT department)

Proxy and VPN should mostly be doable (but of course might not be able to be deployed via Group policies)

https://youtu.be/dH4n8fUjtLQ

Moved my sister to Ubuntu a while ago aside from the occasional support call everything works quite well.

As for my mom, I sat her down way back and told her she needed to move off of Windows XP (support was running out). I explained to her that she could learn Windows 7 and eventually 10 (8 was already a known dud by then) or she could switch to a “Traditional” desktop paradigm that resembled XP closely where she’d only had to relearn once and then keep running it forever, so I moved her to MATE.

While most issues she had with incompatibilities could be solved (and often remotely by me just via ssh) there was one MFP that just wouldn’t scan properly (I’ve scoured the web for guides and sane drivers etc.) in the end I set up a Dual boot Windows (with a nice "switch to Windows " script right in the pinned apps) just so she could scan from there (scans automatically saved on a NAS share that was also available in Linux so she could use the scanned documents there). These days the MFP died and she got a new one that will actually scan in Linux but I kept the dual boot just in case (though I doubt she ever uses it).

This. I have been running it the same way for some time now. Even if you change something on one machine and something else on another nextcloud will just happily inform you of the conflict and then you can open both databases and cherry pick. Never had corruption issues.

Vista was truly the greatest Windows I’ve ever used. I had been using 98 and XP when I bought my first Laptop (the first computer that was truly mine that I had bought with my own money) and it was running Vista of course. Being a curious computer user I twiddled with the system a lot and it broke A LOT so I learned fixing (or reinstalling it) eventually I figured out that Windows only lets you get so far in twiddling and customization so I tried out that hacker OS Linux with a dual boot at first and eventually switching completely. Haven’t run Windows as a daily driver since ~2011-12 now working as a Linux Sysadmin. All thanks to that stupid piece of shit Vista :)

Sorry bit tired rn and English is a second language to me so I’m not quite understanding your reasoning.

If he can come in he can come in

So far so clear

If he can’t come in he can come in

Is that a typo?

My understanding here is this.

1. The joke is that the correct question in this situation normally would be “May I come in” asking for permission rather than “Can I come in” asking if he (physically or otherwise) is able to come in.

2. Since Vampires can only cross a threshold if they are “allowed” in or “invited” inside so unless the resident tells him he may come in he actually physically can’t

However saying he can come in wouldn’t actually be an invitation inside if we’re being nitpicky here since, from the humans point of view, assuming the vampire is another human, he would assume that he can come in from his perspective (i.e. he doesn’t know of any physical hindrance for the Vampire to come in) but since he hasn’t invited him in the Vampire actually can’t come in so the humans statement “You can come in” would be a subjective fact that would not be objectively true?

Sorry I got more to think about on this but gotta sleep. Maybe I’ll edit this later 😅

For files are in git (using stow to recreate) and my documents folder is syncing to nextcloud (selfhosted) and this also to my laptop. This is of course not a “Backup” per se more a “multiple copies” but it gets the job done and also firs my workflow. To be happy with that I want to set up an offsite backup of data from my server to a NAS in my parents place but right now that’s just a to-do I haven’t put any work in yet ;)

It only exists in Germany because this is how Hitler came to power,

That’s correct but in my opinion that’s a great argument to push for a ban. As you say that’s how Hitler came to power with the NSDAP, so it would only be correct to use this law to try and prevent history from repeating itself. If we find out in the court that the law currently doesn’t apply it will be a win for the AfD of course but I believe and hope that it won’t be and that they will be banned. But if we don’t try and enact the law now how long do we wait? Till they are in government? Till they enacted emergency laws …

Also, again, I do not believe this a definite solution to the “problem” of AfD and right wing movements in Germany. I do however believe it will be a big blow to the Right and might give us some room to move into with progressive ideas.

Yes you can only ban them if they threaten the democratic order. Or to be more precise:

Eine Partei kann nur dann verboten werden, wenn sie nicht nur eine verfassungsfeindliche Haltung vertritt, sondern diese Haltung auch in aktiv-kämpferischer, aggressiver Weise umsetzen will.

• source

Which (if you don’t know German) basically means

A party can only be banned if it advocates an unconstitutional position and also plans to use militant and aggressive means to reach their goals

• rough translation I might try to find a source for a better one later

Now I believe that the AfD does fit those criteria (unconstitutional position for sure, but them working together with militant neo-nazis etc. should fill the second criterium as well). But that’s just my opinion and in this situation it does not count as much. The process here is that the court will decide wether or not the AfD fits these criteria and based on that they will be banned or not banned.
This is the important distinction to what you’ve outlined. It’s not “banning political opponents” it’s banning opponents of the constitution. I’m also not saying everyone with opposing views should be jailed I’m saying a party that opposes the constitution should be banned according to the constitution.

Got the Framework 13 Ryzen 5 7640U when it was initially released (Batch 5 I think). Brought my own SSD (500gb I still had kicking around) and RAM (32GB). Only ever ran Linux (Arch) on it. Had a lot of issues at the beginning with suspend pulling lots of power and then (after some tweaking) suspend not being usable because at every wake the Filesystem was read-only. Also the boot option (efistub) would vanish if I hit Ctrl+Alt+Delete during boot (meaning I would have to boot from a live USB every time to fix it. After a while of this (and some troubleshooting) I switched the SSD (with another 1TB leftover from some other project but rather new) and the boot option issue stopped. After undoing my tweak for suspend, suspending now works and at least seems to be pulling less power. So had a bit of hassle at the beginning, now it’s just a great Linux laptop.

The last time they tried to ban a party in Germany was the NPD (another Nazi party) and at the end the Supreme Court decided the reason not to ban them, even though they were clearly unconstitutional , was because they were to few/insignificant (in the end they banned them from receiving party funding which still has a massive effect).

So you couldnt ban them because they were to small and you can’t ban the AfD because they’re to big? Just because enough people vote for a party doesn’t mean they’re not unconstitutional.

The last time they tried to ban a party in Germany was the NPD (another Nazi party) and at the end the Supreme Court decided the reason not to ban them, even though they were clearly unconstitutional , was because they were to few/insignificant (in the end they banned them from receiving party funding which still has a massive effect).

So you couldnt ban them because they were to small and you can’t ban the AfD because they’re to big? Just because enough people vote for a party doesn’t mean they’re not unconstitutional.

Like I stated in another comment banning them won’t be a solution but it will harm them and the fascist movement (just cutting their funding will do a lot).

But yes there’s a bigger problem with the growing right-wing tendencies in the society that needs more than this to be addressed

Most of your points were already correctly dismantled. But I’d just like to ad to

In a democracy where some 30% vote nazi, banning them won’t solve anything. Anything.

Is a sentiment I often feel too. I believe that we have to do so much more to fight against Fascists than just Vote and “use the democratic system correctly”. (I.e. fight fascism in the streets, offer actual political solutions to peoples problems…). But to say this won’t do anything is a huge understatement.

Banning the AfD will:

1. Disband the party leaving them in shambles to reorganize
2. Stop the money flow which is going to the AfD (and in turn to other right wing groups
3. Finally delegitimize the AfD and their main actors in a Democratic setting

A ban would be an amazing feat but it would just be a little breather in the fight against fascism.

Dug a little deeper and found a Pinterest pin that seems to suggest it’s his role as “Richard Roper” from “The night Manager”

Yeah I was thinking something similar. The first Game that came into my head was “Gothic” which I have played since forever (since ive been a little kid) and took me forever to beat for the first time. I don’t know if I would even start playing it today if I didn’t know and love it already. From my perspective today the graphics are outdated and the controls are clunky but it has such a unique heart.

Worked as a sysadmin for years dealing with all kinds of certificates. Liek others have said if you can’t automate the process a paid certificate buys you 12 months at a time in validity. Also wildcard certificates are more difficult to do automated with let’s encrypt. If you want EV certificates (where the cert company actually calls you up and verifies you’re the company you claim to be) you also need to go the paid route

In my experience trustworthyness of certs is not an issue with LE. I sometimes check websites certs and of I see they’re LE I’m more like “Good for them”

The kernel was almost named freax

Did you know that kernel releases have codenames?

My favourite being 4.0: “Hurr durr I’ma sheep” because I remember taking part in that poll.

Sorry I didn’t mean to imply that the Nazis aren’t racist I definitely know that. For me it’s just a different framing between “There are Race riots” (i.e. riots/fights between racial identies) vs fascist/racists rioting because of their racists reasons (and people fighting them in a (self)defense way. I hope I made clear what I meant.

Less to the point of the article and more to it’s wording:

Why the fuck do they call it “race riots” as far as I can tell there are a bunch of rioting fascists and then a broad group of people (refugees, local citizens and Antifa) trying to defend places or stop the riots. This is not a black vs white fight this fight is between fascism and anti-fascism (or at least democracy)