Both are good. Each behaviour is a response to a different problem. Refer again to my footrace analogy.

shouldn’t the selectivity be based on income and net worth instead of skin color?

We should already be taxing proportional to income, and in the 60s when Affirmative Action was implemented, we were.

But the problem isn’t just that there is a lower class at all, the problem is that the lower class is disproportionately filled with black people and minorities as a direct result of racism.

If you think of it like a footrace, we ran the first half of the race giving black people a straight up disadvantage for no other reason than the color of their skin. Now most of the people in the back of the pack are black. We should already be helping all people in back to catch up to the rest of the pack, but this still means black people are disproportionately in the back as a direct result of that initial disadvantage. We could ignore it, and say that after another 300-400 years of equality, maybe things will even out on their own, but in the meantime you have a bunch of people who are living in poverty and dying, and we can scientifically say for an absolute fact that it’s a direct result of historical disadvantages targeting their ancestors based on race.

It’s inhumane to look those people in the eye and say, “tough luck, we’d help, but we decided we don’t do racism anymore.”

This is a remedial question, but that doesn’t make it a bad question. It is a hard problem to solve, and calling an advantage based on race somehow not racist does sound paradoxical at first glance. It’s important to be able to entertain the explanation without outright assuming you’re being attacked by a bunch of obtuse racists.

Hopefully we agree that:

• black americans are at a statistically significant socioeconomic disadvantage compared to white americans, both historically and to this day, and
• this is a direct result of a history of systematic disadvantages specifically targeting them based on their race

Let’s pretend the second bullet point has been solved, that systemic racism is over and done, and we’ve established a perfectly equal union. Even if that’s the case, we are left with the first bullet point as an ongoing problem. The challenge is now, how do you undo the very apparent damage that our history of racism caused, without specifically giving advantages to that group based on their race? And the short answer to a very complex question is: you can’t.

So the US government instituted “Affirmative Action” the goal of which was to deliberately give a targeted advantage to people who have had a history of targeted disadvantages in this country. This catches you up to roughly the 1960s.

But in the last 40 years or so, we continue to see lower class areas of the US disproportionately filled with black americans, and we also see widening wealth inequality affecting virtually everyone. So naturally we also see an increase of non-black people asking the same question as you: “I’m having a hard time too, why are they getting an advantage based on their race? That’s racism!”

The solution was to tax the rich, reduce wealth inequality, and continue to normalize disproportionate demographics. Instead, the wealthy used populism to hijack the republican party, and convince white americans that the minorities recieving these benefits were their enemy. And after 40ish years of pushing this narrative, they succeeded.

With the republican takeover of the federal govt, we can be virtually assured that any ongoing attempts to normalize these unfair demographics will be abandoned, at least at the federal level.

But it’s still a problem, just now one for the people and the states to solve. If you want to support black-owned farmers in an attempt to help pull historically disadvantaged groups out of poverty, you can. If not, that’s fine, just at least please vote for legislation that intends to reduce wealth inequality. (Note that history has exactly two ways of reducing wealth inequality: high taxes on the rich, or war. The question isn’t whether wealth will get redistributed, it’s how).

Tl; dr Yeah, it’s an advantage based on race to solve a problem caused by a history of disadvantages based on race.

Did you know NASA uses Linux on all its spaceships? That’s why there’s no sound in space.

A Linux user time traveling from the 90s/00s would be elated to know that one day someone could possibly have this opinion.

I would not agree. Every metric is subject to Goodhart’s law, approval ratings is no exception. Putin has (allegedly) maintained an approval rating well over 50% for his entire career.

I’m not saying he wants to do right by his constituents, I’m saying he wants to be told he’s a winner. Trump is a narcissist. He’s all the other terrible things because at the end of the day he needs to feel liked. He will only do things that he thinks will fill that void.

He had to defend TikTok to win over youth votes for the election.

Now that he’s pres again, he knows that in one year it will become very apparent that he can’t lower grocery/gas prices, and isn’t willing to take action on home prices, the deficit, AI, or wage inequality.

So instead he has a list of things that will prop up his approval rating, because that is the only metric that actually matters to him. Right now that seems to mean keeping TikTok, and annexing new territory (even if that just means renaming the Gulf of Mexico).

Wow, I’m impressed you actually got that working. Sounds like quite a hack.

Ooo, the MR it links to is 10mo old and still open.

Ahh, I always wondered what “pressure-vessel” was. Thanks for the resources.

Ah, I guess the HDR support in Wayland is still exposed via an “experimental” interface. But it looks like a handful of Wayland compositors support it, including wlroots which a bunch of smaller compositors are based off of.

Does it? What containerization does it use? I thought it was similar to wine, just a process pointed at a windows exe, and an environment to make the app think it’s running in a windows filesystem.

Doesn’t valve already use gamescope (Wayland compositor) with HDR support? And KDE?

Yeah, so the best beginner resource (especially for old hardware) is honestly this old blog series A Trip Through the Graphics Pipeline. But importantly, it was written before modern dx12/vulkan were around, so it will use dx9 terminogy. Also, it’s possible that certain aspects of the vulkan api aren’t possible to faithfully implement to spec with older hardware (while still maintaining reasonable performance, or possibly at all).

From there, it’s probably best to try and implement a backend for your GPU into the radv mesa driver, so probably go take a look at how other GPUs are done.

You will need to become familiar with the AMD GPU programming docs, here.

I’m not going to be one of the naysayers here who says you shouldn’t even try to do this, but as an ex-graphics driver dev, I think you will find pretty quickly that you have your work cut out for you. It would probably be easier to implement a Vulkan-on-OGL translation layer.

Both GPU hardware and drivers are developed by teams of professionals, each of which is hyper specialized in a few components, because none have the time or ability to be familiar with everything about all components (at least, not while also being effective). I’m not saying you can’t do it, and I’m not saying you wouldn’t learn a LOT doing it, but I am saying that by the time you finish, you could have worked a minimum wage job and purchased a dozen 5090s 😉.

Edit: and oh right, then there’s reading through the Vulkan spec, which, if it’s your first graphics API, will take months, if not years to digest.

Is it possible English isn’t your first language, and you interpreted “whatever the fuck” as offensive or snarky? I can assure you that wasn’t the intended tone.

Millenials and GenX started using the internet when we were basically the only ones online. Everyone was a handle, there was no gender, race, or age, just another person. Introducing a generational divide between users is a new concept introduced by deanonymization through social media. But it’s not necessary here. I honestly never know if I’m talking to a 50yo boomer or a kid with an iPad, and I don’t care. Just contribute to the discussion.

Source

I find it kinda concerning how the number of instances is shrinking and number of users per instance is going up. IMO it should be part of the fediverse design to incentivize decentralization to avoid a gmail situation.

Also worrying is that the number of Active Users is trending constant or slightly down, but the number of posts over time is climbing dramatically. To me, this could be a sign of inauthentic behaviour on the rise.

To the wealthy, volatility is opportunity. Yeah, the market will go down for a while, and later it’ll go back up. Billionaires will cash in both ways.

Generational Theory refers to them as a “Nomad” generation, analagous to the more literally named “Lost Generation” one sacculum prior.

Generational theory is not scientific, but the patterns it identifies are certainly interesting. It’s held up over the last 30 years, and seems to be continuing.

So, question: when the billionaire dies, does their wealth transfer according to local laws? So an entire lineage could instantly turn inside out, including bastard children on the fringes of inheritance, with only an estate tax to save them?

I’m just noticing all of those reddit-to-lemmy lookup tools people made a couple years ago have been abandoned. Either out of date, or no longer online 😕.