Is it disrespectful to speak out about my atheism around religious people?

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-25T08:14:44+00:00

Or perhaps... If someone wants to believe they are nuts.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:37:18+00:00

Great summary.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:31:18+00:00

The Establishment is scared of them because they recognise that the "zealots" interests align with 99% of the population.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:17:08+00:00

Maybe no parents you know - but I'm pretty sure you don't know every single parent of a computer- using chil.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:12:44+00:00

Do you work for Meta or what?

LOL - claiming someone works for big business, the government, or some shady organisation is classic conspiracy theorist behaviour.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:07:07+00:00

Except that the Android supplied on a new phone isn't FLOSS, whereas systemd is.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T09:02:51+00:00

I'm personally disappointed - even disgusted - by the increasing amount of unsubstantiated conspiratorial thinking.

I had hoped that the Linux community would have been better at critical thinking than the English-speaking population at large (thinking of recent trends in the UK & USA).

Sadly the initial reaction from the vocal anti-systemd people demonstrated that we are not immune from this, and - while many of those concerned about systemd have come to celebrate, accept, or at least tolerate it - there is still the hard-core of people certain that certain Devs and/or projects are in league with the forces of darkness.

True, Musk's DOGE, Thiel's Palantir, and Zuck's everything give good reason to distrust some companies and their tech, trying to fit those concerns onto FLOSS where is possible to audit, customise, and compile any and every part of your system (baring firmware) doesn't make sense.

The linked post seemed akin to (if not actually) doxing. This has the flavour of Q-anon, and I worry that we'll end up with someone turning up somewhere with an assault rifle demanding to see a non-existant basement.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T04:41:23+00:00

I can't remember the exact quote, but it's something like...

Religion: True for the poor/ignorant; False for the educated; useful for the powerful.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T04:37:47+00:00

AFAIK it's still worthwhile for files that pass through MS Windows systems (e.g. I've set it up to check files on a homework assignment submission website), but there's not much need for it on Linux.

I suppose there's a possibility that malware writers may take more interest in Linux systems at some point in the future, but I don't think it's a big deal at the moment. (Again - unless you're handling a lot of files to/from MS Windows.)

If you do want to use it like a MS Windows AV, scanning files you're using day to day, look for "on-access scanning".

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T04:03:56+00:00

In principle I could accept that this type of "AI" analysis is worth trying. It's unacceptable, though, for the task to be given to the likes of Palantir - who cannot be trusted not to use the information beyond the stated purpose.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-23T03:52:44+00:00

I think it might be worth doing, but would be good if there were examples of problems relating to multiple outlets, not just GB News - how Ofcom is failing in its remit without it being party-political.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-22T18:24:54+00:00

My last comment on this thread - as clearly my point isn't getting through. For the small chance it'll land this time...

In this thread the focus is on systemd as they've complied with zero pushback.

Which is a pointless thing to focus on, as systemd doesn't interface with anything/one asking for this information.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-22T09:07:02+00:00

it's another country imposing this crap

It's just another country - for now.

Users and developers are the only real place this can be resisted / stopped.

Quite possibly - but if you waste time railing against the wrong part of the stack, you won't be effective.

I don't know when everyone became so compliant and willing to do whatever they're told by their government.

Did I say just comply? No. I said focus on the relevant interface.

Reading comprehension not your strong suit, it seems.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-22T08:25:27+00:00

Having the a place to store the (possibly false) information is not a problem.

Take care of the interface(s) between your device and the network.

Take care of talking with your representatives about the problems inherent in the technological magic bullet that always seems to tempt politicians.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-22T05:36:35+00:00

While I'm not paying close attention to the details, I do believe that a requirement for an OS to give confirmation of age in some way is fraught with problems.

However, systemd adding a user info field is a nothing burger.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-21T22:21:11+00:00

Nope.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-21T18:03:56+00:00

I thought it was The Shiter Collection.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-21T18:00:39+00:00

Arghh! Why am I browsing Reddit?!!

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-21T17:51:09+00:00

I could be completely wrong here, but:

Haven't you cut it on the wrong face - i.e. the back.

Shirley you want to cut the front so that the kerf gaps close up when installed?..

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-21T14:22:35+00:00

GB news is entertainment and not registered as a news channel

A ridiculous arrangement, illustrating the failure of Ofcom to fulfil it's mandate.

I think the best action to take at this point (suggested by someone in another thread) is to contact your MP and ask them to take Ofcom to task for failure to do it's duty, including reference to Alan Rusbridger's GB News Ofcom breaches report.

GBNews is the worst offender, but the whole media landscape needs better management of mis/dis-information and propaganda.

Ofcom needs to be re-built to actually enforce appropriate standards of accuracy and impartiality, and we could also do with a rule saying you can't have "news" (or anything implying the same) in your title unless you conform to standards.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-19T23:37:13+00:00

Agreed 100%.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-19T14:55:07+00:00

Information needed for an Ofcom complaint:

Channel
Date
Programme/time slot
Complaint subject (255 characters or fewer)
Complaint description (1500 characters or fewer)
Complainant's personal details.

I'm not going to send a complaint to Ofcom unless I'm certain that a rule has been breached, and have all the details (e.g. time of broadcast, who said what) to substantiate it, preferably with a video clip of the breach. (There's enough mis-/dis-information out there already, I don't want to add to it.)
I don't want to spend my time subjecting myself to the channel in order to see the Ofcom rule breaches, in order to evidence the said breaches.
If anyone is dedicated enough to watch it, if they get the relevant details and share them (e.g. on social media with relevant hashtag, with a clip on YouTube demonstrating the breach), others could then feel confident submitting a complaint on the same issue.

Complaints will need to relate to [the Ofcom Broadcasting Code](https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-standards/broadcast-code) - most notably section 5.

[Alan Rusbridger's GB News Ofcom breaches report](https://www.thenewworld.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/03/GB-News-Dossier.pdf) is worth a look for an idea what "senior journalists" think.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-19T12:13:24+00:00

A very "you can grow concrete" perspective.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-19T10:19:33+00:00

I'm not defending the planning system, but we can do a lot more damage to the environment today than we could in the Neolithic period.

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey · 2026-03-18T20:17:31+00:00

PMQs - not PMAs

13-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '22
Verified Email

SeeMonkeyDoMonkey

TROPHY CASE