#Free operating system

[mohit-mathur]

### The Benefits of Using Ubuntu Over Microsoft Windows in context of Today's Microsoft Outage

In the ever-evolving world of technology, choosing the right operating system (OS) can significantly impact your productivity, security, and overall user experience. While Microsoft Windows has long been a dominant player in the market, an increasing number of users are turning to Ubuntu for its robust security features and cost-effective solutions. Today, we delve into why Ubuntu is a superior…

[iwatcheditbegin]

I know i’ve said it before. But this discourse about the ethics regarding taylor swift being a billionaire are so disingenuous. She doesn’t have a makeup line, clothing line, brand endorsements.

The bulk of her income is entirely from her own talent as a musician. She has not exploited anyone. She’s also not even close to being a cash billionaire when you look at the numbers it’s like half of that ( bc it’s hard to become a billionaire without shady shit) . Taylor is known to pay her employees well. By percentage what she gives away to charity and compensates her team with is unheard of. She gave 10% of her net worth away in bonuses to everyone who worked on her tour. That’s just what we know of.

I’m not even saying this as a fan, but you cannot look at someone like her and how she moves and compare that to other billionaires and oligarchs.

I’m all for wealthy people paying their fair share. I hate capitalism and the current system but I do think she’s a good example of doing the best to be ethical within the current system

[malenjoyer]

Sorry I’m not replying to messages. I do see them. I’m answering some asks and posting a bit of random thought stuff on twitter but I’m feeling kind of like I’m retreating to my old hermit state of internet usage.

These past few weeks I haven’t had energy to do a lot of stuff. It currently takes a lot out of me to reply individually because I’m trying to secure a job for myself again. So a lot of my energy is put there and worrying about my finances and future…

Thank you for the support as always and I’ll try to respond as soon as I feel I can give a decent response to DMs.

As for art stuff, I thought about starting to post again but due to the recent AI stuff that was released about sketches being converted to lineart easily, I got a bit paranoid again so it might take a while. I’m reading comics between breaks and rediscovering my love for stories so that’s good

[tamsiblings]

so I've always wondered this in the back of my mind but your reblog recently brought it back to the forefront

this line especially, but also the vibe you get throughout the entire show that Simon is habitually caring for and protecting river since that what he's always done. And I've been wondering: protecting her from what? The show never shows us what Simon Protecting River looked like before he broke her out of the fucked up lab. I have a pretty good idea that it may have been a form of emotional neglect from their parents. They don't notice River's distress in her letters and basically disown Simon when he goes off to save her so maybe they were the type to never listen to their children or believe them when they expressed their needs. Or care more about how their children's behavior made their family appear socially and less about how their children were actually doing. I also wonder if River didn't have a bit of the Gifted Child syndrome going on and their parents treated her more as a prodigy than a daughter. And Simon had to stand up for her and try to get their parents to see her as a girl first and a genius second.

It would have been really cool to see this actually in the show as a flashback or something, but I bet you've thought about it loads and want to hear your take.

warning: this got reallly tangenty and long as i am wont to do oops <3 putting most of it under a cut

warnings for discussion of emotional neglect and a variety of other factors i think could reasonably be labelled as emotional and psychological abuse. emotional neglect on its own is to my understanding a form of emotional abuse, but i think there are other layers here as well.

anyway heyyyy bestie talking about the tams (including the parents tbh, the little we get of this family structure is fascinating to me) (we do actually get more on simon and river's background than anyone else! bc it's so connected to the current story anyway) is my favorite thing as you may have guessed so thank you for sending this.

and YES i have thought about this a lot <3

simon said he "always has" taken care of river and while i think on a literal level this is likely a Slight exaggeration (even if their parents weren't around physically for that whole aspect of taking care of, i think their material needs were always met and they likely had the means for a nanny or some other kind of support) but on an emotional level, i think this is very true.

i think you are 100 percent spot on with the emotional neglect and other unhealthy dynamics. here's some of what we know on that front:

the tam parents could be affectionate and even indulgent when it was easy and suited their own ends. ie. getting the source box for simon and assuring him he's worth it, calling them "you two geniuses" etc. this could be a very sweet moment and in some ways it is, because i truly believe the tams both believe in the worth and specialness of their children...

but their affection is clearly quite conditional. deeply. and, i think, more than anyone involved quite realizes. it's followed up by "that's the deal - dedicated sourcebox - brilliant doctor'. no matter how lightlyheartedly and affectionately it's said, it's clear it's seriously meant - and baby!simon clearly takes it to heart. (note: i've always interpreted this as simon already expressing interested in medicine and his father basically going "fine, but whatever you're doing, you have to be the best at it". i'm sure attorney or corporate ceo also would have sufficed for their image-focused needs, as long as he was successfuly and prestigious enough.)

i should also note that the the dynamic between regan and her children is far more implied because the focus in safe is mostly on gabriel.

a quote from an interview with sean maher: “It was great to learn where Simon came from. We see that his parents are incredibly ostentatious. There were so many expectations and Simon and River felt so much pressure, trying to be what their parents wanted them to be. And we got an idea of what happened to River. The parents sent her away to a school they thought would further her learning. Maybe they were naive in a sense, to think of only bettering her mind and not listening to her as a girl–as their daughter.” (emphasis mine)

notable here (and i love sean maher for noting this because, understandably because river isn't present in the flashbacks in the episode proper, it's not as clear what river's dynamic with their parents is, but certainly inferences can be made) is that both simon and river feel expectations and pressure from their parents, not just simon.

which leads to me wondering about river going to the academy. i think multiple things can be true here at once. i think, as simon says in the pilot, she did genuinely want to go. she was curious and brilliant and bright and not challenged enough in the current education system she found herself in or by her peers. she wanted something rigorous. i think a lot of that probably DID come from her. but i also do wonder if there was a level of their parents always expecting her to challenge herself in this way because, as you mention and i think implied in the quote above, they valued her brilliance and prodigy above her personhood. i also think it's possible (though i'm less sure on this) that river wanting to go to a school where she lives away from her parents and can both live up to their expectations but where she can distance herself from them could indicate something about how she feels. but might be reading too much into things.

there are also elements of controlling behavior that goes hand in hand with both the conditional love and the valuing their children for their intelligence/ability over simply valuing them as their childhood. in the shooting script, the offer simon gets goes through gabriel, and it's not presented as one opportunity or path simon can take. it's The Plan, and there's no room for deviation even when the most dire of circumstances calls for it. (and like, this would never happen because simon does genuinely value medicine and being a doctor, but in an interesting excercise: how would the conversation look if simon decided he didn't want to be a doctor o some other prestigious high paying XYZ? or even that he wanted to pursue a different opportunity he found on his own and is maybe not quite as prestigious in medicine? i don't get the sense it would have gone over that well.) we don't really get a sense of this with river because again, she's less present in the episode - but i think reasonable assumptions can be made.

^ it's a funny story that simon tells kaylee in object in space, about paying the feds off so they wouldn't tell his father about his drunken (and relatively harmless) escapade with his peers after making surgeon, and tbf, a lot of people probably wouldn't want their parents to know that. but in context with the rest of this, it feels very telling that simon did not want his father (or presumably his mother) knowing he acted at all in a way that could be considered undignified or that he got in any degree of trouble (it doesn't even sound like he was arrested, the police just showed up and he didn't want his parents to find out.)

in many ways, it seems clear both simon and river start off as golden children in their parents eyes - they care about them and value their gifts, but more like you would care about a trophy than a child. they care about what river and simon reflect on them. and notably, when river is no longer just the brilliant prodigy-child but vulnerable, in need of protection, and a symbol of inconvenient truth they don't want to face (a number of them, really - the misplaced trust in their government/society/system, the fragility of status and the false sense of security, their own culpability and failures to protect their children) - instead of helping her when she needs them the most, they ignore and abandon her. and when simon can't do the same, he - as the "truthteller" in many family dynamics of this structure often do - becomes some degree of a scapegoat. he faces the truth they are unable or unwilling to see. they turn a blind eye but simon can't, it's not who he is and he loves river too much. and suddenly, when he's not doing and saying and being exactly what they say he should because he's focused on helping river, he's treated like he's causing problems for no reason - like he's the problem. like he's making a big deal over nothing when he tries to show them the letters, when his father says "are you trying to destroy this family?" as though their daughter being kept and tortured against her will and their own refusal to acknowledge it isn't what's actually doing the family-destroying. and while i think simon getting scapegoated/othered/treated as a problem is a rather new development, and don't imagine they were getting constantly berated - in the scene at the end of safe, YMMV, but gabriel seems a little too comfortable quite ufairly berating simon for things that are quite obviously not his fault or for at all disappointing him. i don't think it was always happening - but i don't think this comes out of nowhere.

on the causing problems for no reason (or a reason they dismiss) component; this feels particularly insidious because they should know their son well enough to know simon doesn't do that. he doesn't do things for no reason, he has a highly overly developed sense of responsibility (which comes back into his dynamic with river ofc.) so like... either they do know that and are purposefully ignoring and even twisting it, or they don't know their son nearly as well as they should.

the scapegoating component lends itself to the extremely uncomfortable gaslighting component in safe. in fairness: i think this aspect of the Tams Very Poor Parenting Choices is likely much more situational and less indicative of past behaviors. regardless, it's pretty rough to watch simon point out things that are quite obviously strange (they don't KNOW anyone called d'arbanville) and have his parents treat him like he's paranoid and insane.

this also comes with a certain level of guilt tripping and beratement. i will say it forever: if i had a child and they were arrested, the FIRST thing i do is ask them if they're okay, figure the rest out later. "

and again: some aspects of all this are situational as we get into the river-at-the-academy component, but i think there's a lot that can be read into the tam family dynamic as a whole based on all this.

so on some level - a lot of THAT is why simon says he's always taken care of/protected river - i don't think he necessarily could have entirely saw or named or what their parents were doing for what it was (which i would argue, as you said, was some degree of emotional neglect and emotional abuse, though some of this is implied or inferred - i would argue based on evidence, but just something to keep in mind). but i do think he developed a sense of responsibility over her and a caretaking role as result.

because it's very notable to me that - for instance - in the river tam sessions, river specifically asks for simon. she doesn't say "i want to see my parents" or even "i want to see my family" but "i want to see my brother." and yes, you could argue that this is because that's who the audience who most care about/be familiar with - but with the rest of the context, it feels extremely significant. in the serenity film, she says something similar to what simon says in that shooting script flashback - "you take care of me, simon. you've always taken care of me. my turn" after simon gets shot and right before she goes in to get his bag and fight the reavers. and like, you could argue that she means ever since the academy - but "always" feels much more weighted than that to me.

it's also interesting to me that river doesn't seem to have as much difficulty reconciling with the fact that their parents abandoned them (and a whole host of other stuff, as established, but that's what the show most focuses on.) now, in fairness, river has a LOT going on - psychic and emotional overwhelm, lots of trauma and intrusive memories - both hers and others, etc - so it makes sense that maybe that just wouldn't be on her register regardless. but i also think... well 1) being so in tuned into what others think and feel, even if she might not have been quite able to name it, i do think she's understood longer than simon (maybe since before the academy; i am still curious if that's paret of why she left) how their parents really saw them. so she's had more time to accept and move on from it. 2) there's this other level where river DID have someone protecting her - simon - even if it took a long time to realize what he was protecting her from. while i think it probably looked less intense than it does in the show proper where she is so deeply traumatized, there is no doubt in my mind that if she was ever upset or anything ever went wrong, it was simon she turned to for comfort or help, not her parents. which tbc: <333 i love them. and this is not her fault at all. but simon Did Not Have That. i think he protected her without quite knowing that's what he was doing for a long time... and didn't realize he needed protection too and wasn't getting it.

which makes it difficult to reconcile and move on from, which is why in the moment in safe when river (seemingly talking about gabriel but likely talking about mal) insists "daddy" will come for them - simon totally shuts down. because he knows that's not going to happen, and it hurts a little too much to deal with, but he's still fairly RECENTLY coming to terms with How Their Parents Are - and the fact that he did not have emotional support. so now he doesn't know how to let himself even ADMIT that he also needs care.

final note (god sorry this is sooo long) i will also say that, while i (as a #tam siblings lover) am often very sad/angry/frustrated about simon and river's dynamic with their parents, and that i certainly will never excuse emotional abuse or this kind of parental behavior, that i try and hope to approach the tam parents in any analysis or ficwriting i might do from a very human angle. the range of human complexity is fascinating to me, and i don't think it does the themes of the show justice to act like the tam parents are outright monsters, totally good or totally bad (note: this is so not in the slightest me saying that i think you are doing this. more just thinking out loud about fandom discussions i have seen surrounding this topic.)

this gets at larger discourse both in fandom and in general i think there is a tendency in our society to want either completely villainize or idolize people (and this maybe becomes especially true in complicated relationships like this). when we talk about abuse to any degree and of any kind, people often want to dehumanize and villainize the abuser in such a way that separates themselves from that possibility - "abusers are evil and inhuman and i'm nothing like that so there's no way i could ever cause that kind of harm etc." but in actuality, there is no inherent internal quality that makes someone an abuser - it is a pattern of harmful behavior that people can choose to do and choose not to do. and i don't want to suggest that people who do this are abusive themselves, that's not what i mean - only that i think the mindset comes from a culture that insists on some very black and white thinking. i think it's a very natural human impulse to want to separate ourselves that way, but also maybe gets us away from seeing the bigger picture. and to be clear: i don't mean to suggest that anyone owes an abuser anything, or that simon and river, for example, should have to forgive their parents. that's not true here or in real life. i only mean to say that people are more complicated than being fully good or fully bad, and firefly reflecting this is one of my favorite things about it.

and again, this is complicated with the tam parents because i'm making a lot of (what i feel are supported, but even so) inferences and assumptions here. so whether you want to identify them as emotionally abusive/neglectful etc is a whole can of worms. but regardless, it's clear their behavior and parenting harmed their children. BUT here are where some major caveats come in:

similarly to the way people often do in other contexts, i have seen people want to outright completely villainize the tams and while i understand this impulse, i think it comes from the same place that a lot of well-meant but misguided discussions do. there are those that think they either must have never cared about river in any capacity at all or actively agreed to sell her out to the alliance (a theory i not only don't like or subscribe to but actually feel misses the point of what's going on with the tams and is less interesting even besides). but i think that sets up the tams to look cartoonishly evil in a way that the narrative doesn't support or intend. do i think the tams are good parents? well, no! i think it was easy to look like good parents when things were easy, but even then, there were cracks. (though i don't think everything was always bad - even in abusive situations, that is usually not the case - there are reasons why people love their parents and stay and have a hard time seeing the bad - because things aren't always like that.) i have also seen people insist or write like it's a given that the tams must have also been physically abusive, and while i don't want and would never tell anyone what they can and can't write, by my own reading, i find that unlikely. i think some of that is often coming from a place of people working through their own stuff, which again - never gonna tell anyone not to do that, you do you - but i also think at times it speaks to a societal tendency to assume that the harm isn't bad enough if it isn't physical - but i think we get a good sense of how deeply simon and river are affected even outside of the confirmation of any physical harm from their parents. (note: i do think the tams being willfully ignorant and leaving their daugher to be tortured and experimented on while on some level know that's what happening is a form of physical abuse or neglected, it's just situational and not in the traditional sense.)

but what i think is so important present, and much more interesting in this story, is that the tams are not evil, so to speak, or at least aren't mustache-twirling villains. they're not even entirely bad-intentioned; i believe they do genuinely want good things for their children, even if they have very specific ideas of what it should look like and how it will benefit them. but they have wholeheartedly, implicitly, without any room at all for questioning bought into the system values of the core and the alliance: prestige, status, and privilege treated as worth, family as a hollow projection of prestige, disruption as the ultimate trespass. to me, the story with regard to the tam parents isn't about them not caring or valuing simon and river at all - it's about valuing those things above them, and how their care is warped and shaped by those harmful systematic values.

now, this is rarer, but i have also seen people want to (maybe in response to above?), if not idolize, then absolve the tams of the role they played in river's abuse at the hands of the academy, but that doesn't ring true to me either. i want to be fair where it's due and say yes, there was danger involved (which simon put himself through) in helping river, but the fact is the narrative focuses much more on the tams focusing on what it could cost them on a social level - their status and "good name", prestige, etc. and at the end of the day, when you have children, you have responsibility to them - and the tam parents failed both of their children on that front.

one thing i also thing is so interesting to note is that simon and river are so loyal and value connection so deeply when it's clear that is not what was most instilled in them on a systematic level or taught to them by their parents. in fact, i think you could argue that while some of it was intrinsic to who they are (here's the old nature vs. nurture debate which i think you could argue simon and river are the two biggest representers of on the show), i also think it's a repsonse to this bond they formed specifically BECAUSE of their parents.

[fairydusks]

Btw from now til the end of November AK Press is giving away ebooks for free 🤍

[hackeocafe]

20 Most Useful Keyboard Shortcuts I Use Every Day (Windows)

In this video, I’ll show you the keyboard shortcuts I use personally every day on Windows to save time and make navigating Windows easier.

[sl33py-g4m3r]

ramble about FreeBSD and Unix~~

how out of my depth would I be trying to install FreeBSD?

would it even boot on my machine?

am I smart enough to go through the install for the system itself as well as get the GUI that I want?

I think you have to go through the command line for quite a bit of time before you get a GUI up and running....

I started off being really interested in BSD/Unix in high school, and tried to fiddle around with a BSD live disc thing in a book (that I don't remember the name of) and then only fiddled around with Linux.

I've been watching videos on youtube of people expressing how stable FreeBSD's modern release is~~

I want to use it on my own hardware; but that's a problem with it I believe, is that it works on sort of limited amount of hardware, as opposed to Linux, that you could even run on a toaster...

Is it really that much harder to deal with than Linux?

Of course I've only dealt with a few distros~~ the rundown of distros I've messed around with are;

Ubuntu (not anymore tho)

Debian (current os being Linux Mint Debian 6)

OpenSUSE briefly (tried to get my sibling to use it on their laptop, with them knowing next to nothing about Linux, sorry...)

Fedora back in high school, I ran it on a laptop for a while. I miss GNOME....

Mageia (I dual booted it on a computer running windows 7, also in or right after high school, so a long time ago)

attempted GhostBSD but it wouldn't boot after install from the live CD (also many years ago at this point)

I like to hop around and (hopefully now I have, yeah right...) I can't make up my mind which I actually want to use permanently.

Linux Mint Debian edition is really good so far tho~~!!

Current PC is an ASUS ROG Stryx (spelling?) that I bought on impulse many years ago~~ Was running windows 10, fixed the issue and now use the OS stated above~~

or maybe I should maybe ditch Mint and run straight Debian... Thought of that too. and it might have an easier time installing and actually booting than FreeBSD on this machine...

but then BSD and by extension unix is meant to be used on older hardware and to be efficient both in execution of things, and space.

"do one thing and do it well" iirc was a bit of the unix philosophy...

yeah, no I HATE technology /heavy sarcasm/

[jrepin]

KDE Plasma 6.4 released

Plasma is a popular desktop (and mobile) environment for GNU/Linux and other UNIX-like operating systems. Among other things it also powers the desktop mode of Steam Deck gaming handheld. The KDE community today announced the latest release: Plasma 6.4. This fresh new release improves on nearly every front, with progress being made in accessibility, color rendering, tablet support, window management, and more.

Plasma already offered virtual desktops and customizable tiles to help organize your windows and activities, and now it lets you choose a different configuration of tiles on each virtual desktop. The Wayland session brings some new accessibility features: you can now move the pointer using your keyboard’s number pad keys, or use a three-finger touchpad pinch gesture to zoom in or out. Plasma file transfer notification now shows a speed graph, giving you a more visual idea of how fast the transfer is going, and how long it will take to complete. When any applications are in full screen mode Plasma will now enter Do Not Disturb mode and only show urgent notifications, and when you exit full screen mode, you’ll see a summary of any notifications you missed. Now when an application tries to access the microphone and finds it muted, a notification will pop up. A new feature in the Application Launcher widget will place a green New! tag next to newly installed apps, so you can easily find where something you just installed lives in the menu. The Display and Monitor page in System Settings comes with a brand new HDR calibration wizard, and support for Extended Dynamic Range (a different kind of HDR) and P010 video color format has been added. System Monitor now supports usage monitoring for AMD and Intel graphic cards, it can even show the GPU usage on a per-process basis. Spectacle, the built-in app for taking screenshots and screen recordings, has much improved design and more streamlined functionality. The background of the desktop or window now darkens when an authentication dialog shows up, helping you locate and focus on the window asking for your password. There’s a brand-new Animations page in System Settings that groups all the settings for purely visual animated effects into one place, making it easier to find and configure them. Aurorae is a newly added SVG vector graphics theme engine for KWin window decorations.

You can read more about these and many other other features in the Plasma 6.4 anounncement and complete changelog.

[telemachea]

Hi, you're the most classical civilization-y person I know, and I was wondering if you knew anything about The Assassination of Julius Caesar by Michael Parenti, which I'm reading rn. The gist of it is that the popular image held by many (including most Tumblrinas) of Caesar as a "tyrant" is wrong, or at least distorted by the classist nature of contemporary historians, and that Caesar was actually killed by senators angry at his pro-lower class reforms, such as cancelling debts, redistributing land, etc. Is this a popular perspective on the classic civilization perspective of Tumblr?

Hope you're doing well!

Hey, tysm for the ask I hope you are doing well as well!!

I haven't read the book in full but I am familiar with it since it was a scholarship for Julius Caesar's political position. It certainly challenges the classism within traditional classical viewpoints and offers some nuance into the 'Caesar is a tyrant' argument but it focuses too much on the economic/class factors imo.

It's helpful to know key contexts of Roman culture when discussing J.C's assasination. What you need to know is that the Roman Republic was never truly a Republic, especially towards the latter half. To even have a position within the Senate, you had to have a certain amount of wealth (an absurd amount, basically the equivalent of a millionare today on average). So senators basically voted and made policies in the interest of a) their wealth and b) their own political power. The Senate was also split into the optimates and the populares. The optimates were much more conservative and typically won votes through bribery since they were mostly from generational wealth. The populares were more open to change and Julius Caesar, as one of them, did ensure that there was improvement to the poor's life. However, that's not to say that it's out of the goodness of his heart. While the optimates got their votes from bribery, the populares got votes by entertaining the masses a.k.a panem et circenses (bread and circuses). Julius Caesar managed to grow in power because he had great military victories (which brought wealth to Rome and therefore the poor), was popular among the poor, and had the loyalty of his soldiers. To maintain that popularity, he redistributed senatorial land to his soldiers, encouraged class reform, gave money and food to the poor, all of which pissed off the optimates. In fact, previous politicians who had similar policies were killed by lynch mobs or other senators' armies (e.g the Gracchi). So yes, that was a major factor in the assassination.

But what is also important is Roman values itself. The Romans HatedTM monarchy. They hated a one-man rule because a core part of their cultural heritage was having overthrown a king. Having lots and lots of power and being an oligarch was fine in Rome. Lots of other people did it before Caesar. Sulla and Marius had a civil war (which Caesar himself lived through) and Sulla basically seized ultimate power in all but name. What really made the optimates hate Caesar though was that he had control of lots of land outside of Rome due to his conquests in Gaul and therefore had a massive army and power. He was also part of the First Triumvirate alongside Crassus and Pompey, and the three of them had almost total control over Roman politics. Crassus was the rich one for bribes, funding, ect. Pompey was the warlord. Caesar was the more public face of the three. On top of that, the alliance eventually broke down into a civil war between Caesar and Pompey, which threw Rome into even more political instability. Caesar also broke an important rule in the process by bringing his army into Rome by crossing the Rubicon, which added to his image as a powerhungry politician. Needless to say, the Senate was not happy.

There were also other transgressions of Roman social codes. He took Cleopatra as a lover despite her being a powerful, foreign queen (monarchy association). Caesar stepped on some toes by putting a gold statue of Cleopatra in the temple of Venus Genetrix. Obviously, monarchy association again. But it's also a vulgar display of luxuria (Roman concept of indulgence in wealth which they viewed as barbaric. You can be rich, you just can't show it off and indulge yourself) as well as sacrilege since Venus was one of the founding gods of Rome.

The final straw was when Caesar announced himself dictator perpetuus - dictator in perpetuity. Being a dictator wasn't a bad thing. It was just the term for someone given ultimate power for 6 months when Rome faces national crisis (from invasions to natural disasters, the post exists so decisions can be made quickly without vote). The problem lies with the fact that he would be dictator in perpetuity. Rome can't be in crisis forever. Why would you want ultimate power forever if you weren't trying to fashion yourself as a tyrant king? All of this led to his assassination on the Ides of March.

Of course, assassinating him didn't actually bring back the Republic. That thing had been dead from the moment it was conceived and only existed as a farce of democracy. What Caesar's death led to was a power vacuum and plenty of scrambling political wannabes. This led to three more civil wars (or four if you count the war with Sextus Pompeius) ending with Octavian/Augustus Caesar on top. Augustus then went on to create the Imperial system of rule while pretending it was a Republic (so not much of a difference from the poor's perspective tbh apart from maybe stricter moral laws and new aqueducts).

In summary, there's lots of different views on this. Some people think Julius Caesar was an actual tyrant who had it coming. Some think it was because the Senate didn't like the fact he tried to take ultimate power and left them with none. Some think it's because the Roman elite hated the poor. Some think it's a mixture. I've tried to be as hollistic as I could in this explanation so I hope this helps!

[dimalink]

Retro comp with Free Dos and Win2000 cool thing!

During several months, I try to install Windows 2000 and Free Dos. One feature to take into account, that computer was old and cannot load from flash. But, it can see flash with small size in OS. For example, with Windows 2000. Files sometimes, copying wrong with big size. But, with small size like 2gb. Everything works good. Computer is old. This is one core 1.5ghz.

So, with compact disc all the installation. It takes time. And. Later. one more feature. I have installed windows 2000. Later. create partition for MS DOS format. All the hard drive is about 40gb. 32 I set for Windows and 8 gb for Free Dos.

So after, I insert install disk with Free Dos. You can download it from authors website. And, if I am right, it was updated recently. And, I make install from disk. Installation is simple and easy to understand. Beautiful MS DOS theme. They good for the eyes if you like MS DOS.

And, something interesting. How it was with me. Disc D – this is MS DOS format partition. And disc C Windows 2000 partition. And, what make Free Dos compact disc? It exchanges with places! How clever it is! I was surprised. It was funny! He finds this by himself – this MS DOS partition. And set it with letter C. And I have read that Free Dos can only be written with disc C, and what place to be booted from. And all like this is works. But he makes it by himself! So, this is Free Dos now!

And, I again, do install with Windows 2000 at the windows 2000 partition. So, it was broken there. Well, to install windows 2000 – it is easy thing. I think that for those OS users. As Windows 95,98,2000, they do it often. So, set it to second partition. Disc D. Which is, already, we format with once again to Windows 2000. And that’s all! We have two operating systems!

This is funny. For those, who likes to dig with system. So, I want to learn it a little. So that’s why, I have installed these systems. First step is done. But, it was lots of problems on my way.  But, now I have a nostalgic themes. Free Dos it is modern version for MS DOS. Windows 2000 – beautiful visual OS. For retro users. So, it is cool to have all windows versions installed. And even to try exotic like OS/2, OSR2. Windows Memphis. Main - it is to have all these with usage! So now, I have retro comp with Free Dos and Windows 200! Cool thing!

iron (hardware) and programs. From time to time i restore computers, retro computers. Try retro soft. Check some programs. And write about all of these. Dima Link is making retro videogames, apps, a little of music, write stories, and some retro more.

WEBSITE: http://www.dimalink.tv-games.ru/home_eng.html ITCHIO: https://dimalink.itch.io/

[tmarshconnors]

"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels ... upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!"

Mario Savio (December 8, 1942 – November 6, 1996) was an American activist and a key member of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement.

[lovesickhotel]

Hello My Freind 🌹

I want your support My house was destroyed and I am currently living in a tent with my children 😞

My Mom and Dad who suffer from chronic diseases, They need urgent medical care and medications that are not available 💔

https://www.gofundme.com/f/Help-Mohammed-alhabil-Family

Please help my family by donating or reblog my campaign is going very slowly 🙏🍉

.

In dire need of help

[sibyl-of-space]

HP 13 Stream: RAM Upgrade?

I'm getting very far ahead of myself here but I have a bit of a project in mind for the future.

Currently I have a piece of crap HP nothingbook that came out 9 years ago and was a glorified scam to get people to buy OneDrive storage. It has two gigs of memory and the worst operating system known to man (Windows 8.1) but it came with like a year of lots of free OneDrive storage or some shit. Anyway I didn't buy it, it ended up in the E-Waste at work for understandable reasons, and I respect its owner for holding on to it for this long despite it being a piece of junk.

I put Ubuntu on it so it's infinitely more usable already. It can run my game because my game is potato certified. It cannot, however, do much of anything else. So once I no longer need it to bug test the Linux build (for which its service has been invaluable) I wanted to look into whether I could make it a slightly more usable machine for if I just want to play around in Linux.

Unfortunately and unsurprisingly, the ram is not in a slot you can swap out, but it's soldered directly onto the motherboard. This is usually referred to as "non upgradable" RAM (as in if you want more you are shit out of luck and are supposed to just buy a new laptop) because it is such a pain to try and swap out that it might as well not be, but technically it IS often upgradable, there's just a lot of asterisks and "ifs," "ands," or "buts" about the process. I've only just started my research into it so I'm not going to pretend to be an expert.

I did however open it up and I am honestly impressed by the sheer gall.

Those four empty slots on the left there.... They straight up have the room for four more chips of RAM. Like the term "non-upgradable" is a straight-up lie here. You don't even have to remove the existing RAM and replace it, you just have to get four more chips, solder them on (ball soldering is an entirely different beast than soldering iron jobs, but still) and then probably move some resistors around that tell the motherboard how much RAM it has.

I knew this HP Crapbook also had a 4GB model so I was pretty sure I'd be able to upgrade it to 4GB somehow, but I didn't expect to literally see that only half of the chips were put on the motherboard. The sheer audacity here....

Anyway, I won't attempt this repair until I don't need the laptop to test my game anymore, because I'm fully aware I might end up cooking the motherboard or shorting something or otherwise irreparably damaging it. But it would be nice if I could get that extra two gigs because I think with even just 4GB of RAM it would be perfectly usable for just random dicking around in Linux purposes

[sergeant-macho-nacho]

Imagine the center being the far end of politics to the point the right and left align with each other.

[ceausescue]

well now that the totally pointless bit fiddling is out of the way its time to completely rewrite the entire garbage collector to be one or two orders of magnitude more complicated. actually come to think of it its no longer clear when to collect. maybe check on asking for more blocks?

[bonyfish]

Nik is at their Pathfinder game tonight so I am alone in the house with the cat and valiantly restraining myself from configuring my computer to dual-boot Linux