.. although Israel is not one of the council's 47 voting members and did not always attend meetings
Sounds like they weren't 'engaged' all that much in human rights in the first place then anyways, so whatever.
Ah, yes I forgot that angle -- that period of indentured servitude (slavery) for the hope of being allowed to participate in the illusion of "The American Dream" ...
Hell yeah. I would also hope as many engineers as possible resign from SpaceX, Tesla and the Boring Company, but sadly too many of them probably a) have no problem with their boss's ethics or b) are financially stressed and are afraid to do so, or c) are addicted to the lifestyle enabled by their pay grade.
The biggest trick capitalism pulled on all of us is keeping wages 'not too low, not too high' so we are all not starving, yet afraid to walk away from our jobs.
And I agree about FPTP. I still have a grudge against the Liberals for promising to abolish that in 2015 and then reneging on it.
Agreed, it's my number 1 reason I would never, ever have voted for Trudeau -- didn't vote for him thee first term either as I suspected he would renege. (Reason number 2: he also reneged on his promise to reign in CSE and CSIS for domestic spying and privacy invasions).
If there isn't an organized strategic voting campaign nationwide, I may have to bite the bullet and vote Liberal this time though, if Carney is the leader, since the percentages seem to be leaning to them being the only way to prevent a hard right-wing shift here in Canada.
No no, I certainly do NOT want a 2 party system. But if the other parties could guide people to the idea of strategic voting via some sort of official but temporary alliance ... that's the idea. Something, anything we can do to prevent fragmentation which would let the CPC rise up through a divided middle.
FPTP (First Past the Post) is so, so broken.
Libs, NDP and Green just need to unify for this election cycle. It's a strategic move they have to make. Can they do that, run as a single ballot?
Yes! Every Canadian municipality and provincial department should do this.
I admit I may misunderstand the situation; I hear there's a compatibility layer or something named xwayland -- will that allow older apps linked against x11 to run on a wayland desktop?
I'll have to give wayland a try again soon -- if it's stable on my laptops and I can figure out the custom keyboard layout stuff (I posted on another thread recently asking about that -- sounds like there are good solutions for that) then I'll feel comfortable moving to it finally.
Things must move on eventually, I suppose. I just really hope they reach feature parity before then. It sounds like most of the annoyances that have kept people from migrating are being tackled, so I'm hopeful.
The blog post says they're just deprecating X11 APIs at this point; GTK5 will remove them.
I'm still very worried about this. Wayland still has many rough edges and I think forcing a move to X11 is premature. One of the main benefits of the Linux ecosystem has always been that it strived to run on hardware far longer than commercial vendors, who have gotten even worse at forcing obsolescence of hardware for purely revenue-focused reasons (looking at you, Microsoft -- Win11 refusing to work on chipsets it is perfectly capable of running on...)
As someone who hasn't yet moved to Wayland, how good is support these days for alternate keyboard mappings? Is this something that each individual window manager needs to support, or does Wayland itself manage them?
Not just "international keyboard" support, but truly arbitrary keyboard/symbol mapping support. I muddle in programming with APL, which needs its own key mapping with Unicode symbols.
I recall KDE had its own mapping support which used some system APL layout but I'd rather not have key mappings tied to a specific window manager.
Is someone still going to get those stranded astronauts down during all this chaos?