Linux Mint has been so great and stable that is really hard to get people to move to something else.

If you turn VPN off, you lose.

Mario Kart: Double Dash!!

My rule is not to follow anything that has not completed already. 5 seasons can still let you hanging or can still turn to shit.

Is this right? Out of curiosity, how do these sites flag themselves as content for adults?

Obviously, this is the solution. Sites that do this correctly, and software that detects the metadata. Parents are the ones that need to choose the correct software and enable the correct settings.

Sites that do not set the correct metadata are legible to be banned by authorities.

That one was compromised. The good fork is “I still don’t care about cookies”.

I’d rather Mozilla ask for donations than to give me ads and bloatware. I’d be more than happy to donate periodically. If they don’t correct the current course, I’m not sure for how much longer they’ll keep loyal users like me. I’m sick of having to turn a bunch of things off every time, and of having to be vigilant about the new crap they keep introducing.

If it’s to favor bikes over scooters, that’s probably fine. If it’s to please the car lobby, that’s a sad, corrupt step back for society and democracy.

If all the people they killed come back alive and they’re still banned, all the killing they did wasn’t the reason for the ban.

…but they won’t come back.

I think it is clear that it’s just a matter of time that a faster, more secure, free and open source operating system will win over a worse alternative.

What percentage of people smoke cigarettes compared to the percentage that do cocaine? Perhaps prohibition would dramatically reduce the number of users, even if that number is guaranteed to never reach 0?

I’ve been following this rule for about a good decade now. It doesn’t apply only to Netflix series.

The are many series to watch; no point in starting to watch one without any guarantee that the series will keep consistent good ratings until the finale.

I did mean to reply to your comment. Just trying to say that I don’t need 2nd homes to be taxed much more higher that 1st homes if the issue can be fixed without getting to that point. Although it shouldn’t be off the table if it’s necessary to guarantee people can have access to homes.

It’s not unreasonable, but if after taxing 3rd and 4th homes (etc.) to oblivion the issue persists, then also second homes should be taxed high. I truly believe that extreme would not be needed once it’s made humanely forbidden to own multiple homes without intention of ever living in them.

Worth adding that it should not be the number of homes what should be taxed, but based on the market value of those properties.