drewofdoom

Except the majority didn't put those people in power when we're talking about Texas. Texas is not majority Republican. Most of the Democrats are concentrated in the urban areas - Dallas/FW, Houston, Austin, etc. Nevertheless, there's a nearly 50/50 split in population affiliation. However, the Republicans control the state through a combination of voter suppression and gerrymandering. And, of course, the independent wildcards.

Point is, it's not the majority who are keeping the state red. It's the majority of the people who are allowed to vote when calculated in such a way as to make Republican votes count more than Democratic votes. The state is rigged to keep Republican control regardless of the actual majority.

Shouldn't be, though. Humans deserve rest.

TBH, it sounds like you should go with a distro that makes no assumptions. Like an Arch/Endeavor. It definitely sounds like you're current distro doesn't meet your needs/ideals if you're this angry about a default change.

Let's be fair to the distro maintainers, though. They have the option to either keep shipping and developing against abandoned code, or they move with upstream. Since no one is developing X11 anymore, they're all moving to the new stuff. Most of them changed defaults years ago, too. Hard to develop new features when X is so long in the tooth.

The writing has been on the wall about the death of X11 for a long time, now. No one stepped up to fork it or take over maintenance. So it goes. But this is Linux, so you're free to run it forever. Or even fork and maintain it yourself.

FWIW, Wayland+Nvidia was fine for me. Promising, even, considering how new it is. There are bugs to squash, sure, but there always are in new software.

It happens. Apology accepted. You don't have to downvote yourself, lol.

Thank you for being mature enough to recognize the situation for what it was and to reply with honest self-reflection.

Ummm... Sure... Progress takes time, and it won't speed up at all if everyone says "it's not ready," and edge cases never get tested. I mean, the project is sixsteen years old now. It's been more than just " pretty good" for years at this point.

And I doubt that your distro is going to drop X11 session support anytime soon. So if you reinstall, you may need to do one more step to make that the default. Big whoop.

But the real meat here is that you had a bad experience something like a year ago, and it seems like you've developed true hatred over it. Would it help to know that Nvidia and Wayland play nicely now? They have for quite some time.

FWIW, I had very little trouble with xwayland even years ago. It didn't really require any setup for me. It just kinda worked. Sure, there will always be SOME weirdness, but overall it's been working really well for years.

Anyways, I'm sure you can still toggle over to your X session for years to come. At least until your DE decides it wants to go wayland only.

Nice insult, I guess? Is that the new thing instead of calling someone a bot?

Anyways, I guess the explanation of how OP took the traditional brownshirt and updated it to fit the color that represents Trump in order to propose that his fascist forces could be called 'orangeshirts' just kinda flew over your head, huh? It's ok, maybe you'll get it somewhere down the line.

I mostly agree with your response, except for chastising OP about the color of the shirt. They start by mentioning brown, then parenthetically say "orange" as an unveiled reference to Trump.

This is because Trump is known to use a LOT of bronzer that turns his skin an unusual orange color. So what OP was trying to do was to relate the brownshirts to the presumed task force that Trump would create if he became a dictator.

You don't lose your right to vote just for being arrested. In Colorado, the person would need to be a convicted, currently-incarcerated felon to lose their right to vote. Felons who have completed their sentences (even if they're out on parole) regain their voting rights.

And here's the other argument we hear all the time. "This bill doesn't fix everything, so it's pointless and should be dropped."

Drinking in a car is illegal, but how would an officer be able to tell if there are passengers drinking behind tinted windows? If the driver has booze in his or her or their yeti, how would a cop know? Since the cop can't know, drinking in cars should be legal, even for the driver.

That's basically what you're arguing.

Sometimes a bill is stripped down in order to pass with conservatives or moderates. Sometimes a bill is a trial balloon for what you really want to pass. Sometimes a bill addresses a specific issue, and that it doesn't fix some other issue is just moot.

And sometimes you have to walk before you run.

LOL, "I'm willing to listen to reasoning, but only if you format it in a way that I'm willing to read."

For real, though, fewer guns means fewer gun crimes. The whole 'then only outlaws will have guns' is really a myth. Statistics have shown over and over again that the vast majority of criminals who purchase guns do so legally. If they can't purchase one locally, they just go a state over where the laws are lax. The whole 'black market' gun stores thing is just a false argument.

The idea that a 'good guy with a gun' will make everyone safer is also pretty well debunked. Just look at John Hurley - the 'good guy with a gun' who was posthumously branded a hero after he was shot by the police.

Guns are inherently unsafe. We're never getting rid of them in military applications, but any reasonable restrictions for private ownership should be a no-brainer.

All the arguments for 'private gun ownership makes us safer' fall apart under any scrutiny. So does the constitutional argument. The only real, provable argument you have is that your personal freedom to own a killing machine is more important to you than public safety.

Foreign policy has nothing to do with fascism. Like literally nothing. Any form of government could do that.

Besides that, Republicans have done just as bad. Oliver North comes to mind...

There are a lot of reasons to not judge it yet. First and foremost, the director/show runner has zero input on the trailer. That's all the marketing department, and the trailer is designed to get as many eyeballs as possible on the final product. Numerous examples exist of trailers which bared little resemblance to the movie/show/game/whatever.

Secondly, they buried the lead on the director. Jonathan Nolan did direct much of Westworld. But he also wrote a bunch of award winning films for his brother, Christopher Nolan. Movies like Memento, Interstellar, The Prestige, and Dark Knight. He's no slouch, and I'll reserve judgement until I see it.