• 106 Posts
  • 2.98K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle
  • I completely understand, but don’t you see that the lack of self-evidence is an inherent weakness of the scheme which allows the cons to easily weaponize it? Unless we enact some form of censorship on what certain actors can say (factuality, etc), which I’m not opposed to, I don’t see how you fix that. Perhaps the current carbon scheme is not sustainable, even if it works economically. If replacing this policy with something more self-evident is the magic bullet to curb Polinever’s enthusiasm, I’d be 100% for it, because he’ll also get rid of it and do worse in other fronts. “Axe The Tax” is leading by 19% and 27% points at the moment. Clearly this shit resonates. I’d be curious to see what would happen if we took away the axe. Perhaps you believe the knowledge gap can be filled instead. I’m skeptical.


  • Why Axe It?

    Because if people don’t want it, democracy could give us something worse than no carbon tax - politicians that would kill it and increase emissions.

    The carbon tax may be “most efficient” from free-market economist point of view but that view itself disregards the political externalities which could upend the whole equation over the long term.

    If the carbon tax is felt unfairly by the majority then a different scheme should be implemented that doesn’t feel this way. For example, if most people are getting what they paid in carbon tax and some even more, then instead of insisting on a broad market approach, exclude individuals from the scheme. Tax only firms, perhaps over certain size or over certain emissions. When it comes to individuals, perhaps invest public money in creating cheap alternatives for individuals. Like I don’t know, massively expand public transit. Build high speed rail. We can’t build a single fucking LRT line in Canada’s biggest city for 15 years now and the TTC has been running on a shoestring for at least that long. You’re trying to achieve these things with the carbon tax anyway (shifting behaviour to lower carbon options) but it matters how people feel about the means to the end. If they feel punished and especially if they feel punished with no alternative then they’ll give you Polinever and the whole scheme goes down the trash chute.

    Speaking of majorities, given FPTP “a majority” here could be as little as 39% so a plurality is more accurate.

    Also I’m not trying to absolve the reformacons from responsibility of their fuckery in all regards discussed in this thread. They’re objecitvely making all of these problems worse.


  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.catolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldapt install firefox
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    Ignore the noise and go with Ubuntu LTS. When you get comfortable with that, you could try Debian.

    You could play it backwards too. Try Debian, if you can’t get it to do what you want, wipe and do Ubuntu LTS. But I do not recommend this path if you have no idea what you’re doing. People underestimate how difficult it is to do simple things when you don’t know how to, no matter how trivial.






  • I don’t think you can. On the other hand, if you register a Google account, use a secondary user on your phone to login, install the app and activate the Chromecast, I think you can subsequently use it without the Google account. Delete the secondary user once you’re done with the setup. You wouldn’t have given Google any useful data and you’d have cost them some.


  • Not necessarily. For all of these cases, Debian, Ubuntu, Pro, the community and Canonical are package maintainers. Implementing patches means means one of: grabbing a patch from upstream and applying it to a package (least work, no upstream contribution); deriving a patch for the package from the latest upstream source (more work, no upstream contribution); creating a fix that doesn’t exist upstream and applying it to the package (most work, possible upstream contribution). I don’t know what their internal process is for this last case but I imagine they publish fixes. I’ve definitely seen Canonical upstreaming bug fixes in GNOME, because that’s where I have been paying attention to at some point in time. If you consider submitting such patches upstream as actively involved in project development, then they are actively involved. I probably wouldn’t consider that active involvement just like I don’t consider myself actively involved when I submit a bug fix to some project.





  • Exactly. In Debian, the community implements security patches. In Ubuntu, Canonical implements security patches for a part of the repo (main), the community implements them for the remainder (universe). This has been the standard since Ubuntu’s inception. With Ubuntu Pro, Canonical implements security patches for the whole repo (main and universe).