TheLazyNerd

That’s your opinion. It’s wrong.

Only facts can be right or wrong.

Anyway, I know there are applications that don't have binaries, but most do. I am not a lawyer, but if I'm not mistaken, source code is under U.S. law protected by the first amendment while binaries are not.

Also, it doesn't matter who owns the copyright. The laws specifies "a person that owns, maintains, or controls an application".

I am not saying that the law is FOSS friendly. I am saying that the law does not cover all FOSS software despite it being the clear intend of the lawmakers to cover all software. In such cases it will have to be decided by courts (I believe courts still have this function for state laws), whether it also applies to FOSS software.

What I am saying is that the lawmakers clearly do not understand the topic they are trying to regulate.

The word 'application' means the binary. The source code is not the application.

According to (f), the user is officially the developer of a FOSS application:

• The user is the owner of the binary. (Although with copyright restrictions)
• The user often maintains the application by installing updates. (In FOSS applications updates are rarely forced)
• The user controls the application, as FOSS gives users control.

In some cases (such as the Arch User Repository or the Gentoo distribution), the developer does not even give the user an application but merely source code. The user creates the application.

Countries need to reduce their dependency on the US first:

• The US is the strongest force within NATO, so with Russia getting more aggressive, Europe and Canada need to quickly build up a stronger army.
• The US is NATO's largest supplier of weapons, so Europe and Canada need to invest in their weapons industry.
• The US is the worlds largest manufacturer of CPU's and GPU's. While there are non-US alternatives, these are not as good and are designed for custom build electronics rather than desktops, laptops and servers.
• Most international payments go via the US (even a lot of international payments within Europe). Countries need to persuade their banks to find new ways to do international payments, but the current system is pretty advantages for the banks, so they are reluctant to agree.
• Most cloud infrastructure is in the US. Other countries will need to move their data out of the US.
• The US is a large provider of humanitarian aid, and the largest exporter of food. Poor countries will have to find a new way to get those resources.

ACKTCHU-ALLEE, stealing is a legal construct. Laws only apply to humans, so whale sharks cannot engage in stealing.

Maybe it's a work computer and it's not their choice.

Than complain to IT, not to me.

Maybe they're not a computer toucher and do not have confidence touching computers.

When someone tells you to install Linux and reply that you don't know how, they're often willing to help.

Maybe they were perfectly happy using these OSs before some stupid new feature was introduced.

That is a perfect reason why they didn't have to use Linux, but do have to use it now.

Maybe they're tired or stressed or have no time.

In that case, they're probably not a gamer, which is the best reason not to switch to Linux. Also, when you buy a new computer, it is probably faster and less stressful to install Linux, than Windows 11 (assuming you want a usable win11, with most spyware disabled).

It depends on (sub)culture, but mainly yes.

Bars were often cheap too, so going to the bar multiple times per week was not expensive. The reason these bars were cheap:

• Outside of touristic areas ground is cheap.
• If the local government allows it, the bar can on the owners property.
• The owner and customers were often friends, so friend pricing would be standard.
• Health and safety regulations used to be less strict. Allowing for lower prices.
• The bar was open whenever the owner wanted, instead of on a fixed schedule, making it more easy to combine with a second job.
• Bars rarely had a menu, they just sold whatever they had in stock. Today customers would be upset if an item on the menu was not in stock.

Also,

• Parks used to be less safe and less well maintained, so buying drinks in the supermarket and consuming them in the park wasn't really an option.
• The internet wasn't a thing, so people who wanted to spend the evening gaming had to do so in the bar.

Can I also make my own canonical version of the bible?

If you're not a biologist you probably don't care, but the fact is

#A carpet is not actually a pet at all

Telling a carpet from a pet:

• carpets spend very little time begging for food
• carpets don't scream when you step on them
• there is no such thing as a teacher's carpet

I have been using Nix for a year now, and I am not looking back.

All regular package managers have a problem: Sometimes a system won't work if a specific combination of packages is installed. To prevent this, package managers block those combinations. However, how does the package manager know which combination would break the system? It is tested beforehand, and a list of illegal combinations is maintained. However, this comes with a problem: How do you test every combination of packages? If a package manager tracks just 1000 packages, there are 2^1000 possible combinations to evaluate. This means that when a package manager becomes more popular, and more packages get added, relatively fewer combinations get tested, therefore increasing the chance someone breaks his system by installing a unique combination of packages, that wasn't evaluated and apparently breaks the system. In other words: Package managers have a flaw that causes your system to break if the package manager becomes too popular. The common solution is to create a new package manager from scratch that does exactly the same thing as the old one, but isn't popular yet, and therefore works. However, since it works, it becomes more popular, causing it to no longer work.

Nix is different. It is designed from the bottom up that every combination of packages is possible. It is impossible that one package breaks another. This creates some other advantages as well: there is no evaluation to see whether packages break other packages, allowing maintainers to add more packages to the repository. The result: even though it is not even close to the most used package manager, it is the one with the most packages in its repository.

Yes, there are problems. The biggest is that there is no easy mode yet. But that can be implemented later. For now I see Nix (or something similar like Guix) to be the future of package managers.

I'm not too good with java, but it should be something like this:

public static int convertRomanNumeral(string n){Map.of("M","DD","CD","CCCC","D","CCCCC","C","LL","XL","XXXX","L","XXXXX","X","VV","IV","IIII","V","IIIII");.forEach((k,v)->{n=n.replace(k,v);});return n.length();}