From what I have come to understand (from Lemmy), they make their real money off of your data, and are a privacy nightmare. I actually was ordering from them regularly until I learned that.
I was prepared for this, despite seeing all their banners saying how private they are. All the details I gave them were disposable, and had they let me actually order these items, I would have likely used some kind of disposable credit card to process the payment.
But it’s so bizarre, like they keep throwing one promotion after another, and none actually materialize.
Why does every distro need yet another package manager?
I think most package managers - the ones actually part of a distro - are old. It’s not a question of why they all use different package managers, it’s a matter of them having developed them long ago before any single one matured.
That said, there are other considerations, which is also where new ones come from - different distros will have different approaches to package formats, dependency management, tracking of installed packages and system files, some might be implemented in a specific language due to the distro’s ideology, some might work in a different way (like NixOS), and there’s probably a whole bunch that just want a different interface.
You wouldn’t ask why Linux has a different way of viewing installed programs from Windows, and in the same vein packages are not a universal aspect of Linux, so each distro has to make its own choices.
Also I like pacman, some people complain about the commands being obscure, but I feel like they’re structured in a much more logical way. Don’t confuse it with yay though, pacman doesn’t build packages, and yay is specifically a wrapper around pacman that has different commands, while adding the ability to interact with the AUR.
On fries I really only do ketchup. I use Sriracha on almost everything else that's primarily potato, but not fries. I used to use A1 steak sauce every so often a while back. I hadn't thought of that in years; might need to go pick up a bottle.
the bot will say it is a highly accurate source with highly factual reporting so people will tend to believe with certainty that the U.S. should invade Iraq.
If you actually read the article it seems pretty factual. It lists Bush’s claims and then has a response. Seems to merit the rating.
The reporting of the Bush administration’s position and the response seems fair.
<span style="color:#323232;">**IRAQ:**
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">STATUS: Since 1998, the Iraqi government has barred U.N. weapons inspectors from examining sites where some suspect that nuclear, chemical or biological weapons are made and stored. The United Nations has said it will lift sanctions against the Middle Eastern country -- in place since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and the ensuing Gulf War in 1991 -- only if inspectors can verify that Iraq has dismantled all its weapons of mass destruction. In an editorial this month in a state-run newspaper, Iraq again denied it has or is developing such weapons.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">RESPONSE TO BUSH'S SPEECH: "This statement of President Bush is stupid and a statement that does not befit the leader of the biggest state in the world," Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said Wednesday.
</span>
kbin.life
Oldest