True, but for this purpose it's totally fine.

There's also a big disclaimer at the top of the file:

cat grub.cfg

DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE

It is automatically generated by grub-mkconfig using templates

from /etc/grub.d and settings from /etc/default/grub

Wording could probably be less DOOM SHALL BEFALL YE, as long as you aren't messing around and just adding logging it's not an issue.

More info on grub here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/GRUB

systemd-analyze plot > boottimes.svg

Open the SVG and have a look at what's happening during boot.

journalctl -b will give you some more info too. If you're using grub to boot (probably in /boot/grub/grub.cfg), you can change the loglevel and add the udev option to get a bunch more info. Helped me with a random issue recently. Here's mine for an example:

### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/10_linux ###
menuentry 'Arch Linux' --class arch --class gnu-linux --class gnu --class os $menuentry_id_option 'gnulinux-simple-a96b3354-70dd-45ed-8c6c-95171e9f1e82' {
	load_video
	set gfxpayload=keep
	insmod gzio
	insmod part_gpt
	insmod ext2
	search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set=root a96b3354-70dd-45ed-8c6c-95171e9f1e82
	echo	'Loading Linux linux ...'
	linux	/boot/vmlinuz-linux root=UUID=a96b3354-70dd-45ed-8c6c-95171e9f1e82 rw  loglevel=3 udev.log-priority=debug 
	echo	'Loading initial ramdisk ...'
	initrd	/boot/amd-ucode.img /boot/initramfs-linux.img
}

No. If you're banning by IP, then that IP is banned for everyone using that IP.

I have no idea how frequently this is used, I've never been IP banned, but for this exact reason it seems like using a sledgehammer to kill a cockroach. IP bans (apparently) last only a few days and are easily defeated by using a proxy / vpn, so I doubt they are very common because it's ineffective.

I would assume more modern blocking uses OS fingerprinting paired with IP and geolocation (assuming an anonymous user) to more effectively block. But I could be completely wrong there.

The same could be said about the internet. Surely, a direct connection between every point would make the internet ultimately fast, better experience, etc etc, but this rapidly becomes a huge problem the bigger the system gets.

In fact, we already have a massive point to point transit system, and it totally sucks ie cars. As soon as you start to take a look at the bigger picture and consider all the variables, you start to see the utopia just isn't. Congestion, pollution, upkeep, management, infrastructure, it's all exponentiated by the point to point system.

The system most countries with decent public transport have is the hub/spoke model, where massive transports (trains, planes, buses) travel between hubs, and smaller feeder services (buses, light rail, taxis) transport people from the hub to the destination. No system is perfect, but this is as close to it as you can get.

I used to take the train every day, my experience was fine, I would argue that bad experiences aren't due to trains but due to poor investment and management.

That sounds like hell

I've been using Arch for years and can't pull myself away because everything just works. Whats the difference between arch and whatever the derivatives are? I don't even know what distros to arch are the Ubuntu / mint to debian

I hope I didn't.

..wait

Closely followed by an even more deadly ground accident from the falling debris...

Dam, I thought I was good at intentionally misunderstanding but you well and truly beat me here! Bravo!

yes but in theory

This is going to be really high cost though. If only there was a way to move people en masse around a city, with a reliable and frequent service, funded by tax payer dollars so the cost for an individual is extremely low and affordable..

Alas, no such thing has ever been invented.

Ah yes, 'life,' one of the qualities that computers definitely have.