Killing in the Name

source

Here’s the clip

Yup, that makes sense. I hope you get it working!

Oh, sorry if my response was too basic-level for your experience.

I get what you’re saying about “cis men” being explicitly about gender. I took it as meaning phenotypic males, and that they used “cis men” either for simplicity (perhaps to avoid getting into the details of trans people that they thought was irrelevant to the point they were making) or because they were just imprecise with their language. It’s also possible it was based off of something from earlier in the conversation that we can’t see because it’s just a screenshot.

Anyways, I agree, it was poorly worded, but I think the point they were trying to make was pretty straightforward (unless you insist on interpreting what they said to be something about genes affecting gender expression, then it doesn’t make sense).

I think you have the wrong mental model of how the AUR works. You don’t enable it and then it works with pacman (which is what it sounds like you are thinking). Instead, it’s a repository of packages that require a different method of installation. This is described in section 2 of the wiki page you linked:

1. Acquire the build files, including the PKGBUILD and possibly other required files, like systemd units and patches (often not the actual code).
2. Verify that the PKGBUILD and accompanying files are not malicious or untrustworthy.
3. Run makepkg in the directory where the files are saved. This will download the code, compile it, and package it.
4. Run pacman -U package_file to install the package onto your system.

More detailed instructions are on that page.

However, if you want a pacman-like experience, you can install an AUR helper. You’ll still need to install the AUR helper via the steps above, though.

I think you’re misunderstanding the point the OP is making. Typically, male/female are used when referring to sex, and masculine/feminine and man/woman are used when referring to gender. So this conversation isn’t about gender identity at all, but completely about biological sex.

There are a bunch of factors that go into determining sex. The two main categories are related to the person’s genes (their genotype) and how the person physically presents (phenotype). The biggest genetic marker is whether the person has XX or XY chromosomes (or some other combination). The easiest marker for phenotype is the person’s genitalia, but there are others, such as gonads, gamete production, hormones, etc.

So even just talking about biological sex, a person’s genotype and phenotype might give conflicting determinations of sex. So an “XX male” refers to someone with the genotype of a female, but the phenotype of a male, but says nothing about their gender identity or any surgeries they might’ve undergone.

With that in mind, someone with a PhD in genomics seems to be in the right field to address gene expression and genotypes vs phenotypes. Although you’re right that we shouldn’t rely on authority, but instead on the arguments presented. What we’ve been shown here, though, isn’t a fully fleshed out debate. It’s about 60 words on social media that amounts to “your mental model of sex is wrong; here are cases to rebut it”

I remember the DS had a similar feature. You could connect to people nearby and they could download the game and play with you. It was super cool, and I hope this becomes more common.

If it’s on Github doesn’t that make it OS?

No, when talking about open source software, people typically refer to a definition along the lines of the Open Source Initiative’s Open Source Definition. To distinguish this from software that you can only see the source (but don’t have rights to copy and modify it), they’ll use the term Source Available Software.

I don’t really know about the software you guys were talking about, but the repositories I looked at used the MIT license, which is OSI approved. However, that might not be all of the code they use. It’s not uncommon for a company to open source a “base” version, but they deploy a version that’s altered from that (I’ve got no clue whether they do or don’t).

People often use the OSI’s Open Source Definition when using the term “open source”. One of its criteria says “The license must allow modifications and derived works” which this license does not allow.

It’s a twitch meme

Ctrl-Shift-N restores closed windows

surely there would have been at least one star between it and Earth. Or am I (as a non astronomer) underestimating how much space there is in space?

Yes, you might be underestimating the emptiness of space, but it’s also a case of selection bias. The only stuff we see is stuff that isn’t blocked by something closer. There are black holes out there with a star between us and it, but we don’t know about them because we can’t see them.

A somewhat related fun fact is that we can’t see very far in the plane of our galaxy because our view ends up being blocked by stars and dust. So if you plot the position of the galaxies that we know about, the structure looks like two cones.

The way it is usually verbally described however I would have thought a black hole is in the center of a sphere so that the image should just look like a circle (no hole)

The system of around a black hole (or any other object in the universe) has an angular momentum that is just the sum of the angular momenta of all the parts that make it up. If it’s dense enough that collisions happen frequently (or given enough time), the collisions make it so that all of the constituent parts end up with angular momentum in about the same direction. This is why there’s a disc and not a sphere. Anything with a different angular momentum ends up crossing through the disc, colliding with the stuff in the disc.

And if it really is donut shaped then if it rotates 90⁰ we would see no hole just a thick line of the stuff circling it and yet we never see images like that.

We wouldn’t, actually. Because of the light-bending effects of a black hole, you see the opposite side of the disc over/under the black hole.

deleted by creator

Sorry, i said it was a mersenne prime, then realized it wasnt, so edited it and deleted it. It was a mess

It’s not

That is what it means. Any detail in the waveform that is not captured by a 48kHz sample rate is due to frequencies that humans can’t hear.

Yeah, it’s like saying I can “compress” a png of the Mona Lisa to just the string “Mona Lisa” because I have a database of art.

Now my question is, how should I deal with these pacnew files? should I always remove them, always replace them, always read them and decide?

Always read them and decide what to do. However, what to do usually isn’t too remove or replace them, but to update them with the changes instead. Most text editors have a way of looking at a diff of two files. This will highlight the differences and you can decide based on the individual changes (maybe it’s something you purposefully changed, maybe it’s a change to the default). If you use vim, vimdiff will do this.

I’d rather not read these things everyday, it’s a bit boring, so I hope there’s a better solution. How do you deal with these?

After you make your decisions on what to do, delete the pacnew, otherwise you’ll keep getting messages about it. They don’t get updated all that often (except mirrorlist, I usually just delete that and run reflector every once in a while).

Dominic Pezzola, who had joined the group only weeks before the January 6 attack, declared himself “a changed and humbled man” ready to return to a quiet life as an apolitical father and partner to his girlfriend.

Pezzola, after getting sentenced to 10 years, raised his fist in the air and yelled “Trump won!”

Hmm…

cd without arguments takes you to $HOME, so it’s the same as cd ~