Well it does seem to be a somewhat confusing subject, so forgive me for getting it wrong. I must have misunderstood or misremembered the information I read when setting up the VM 10 months ago. As I said, I have very little experience with them and was honestly just asking if it’s not almost as good. I wasn’t trying to ‘make it out’ to be ‘not janky’.

According to Wiki, KVM " is a … virtualization module in the Linux kernel that allows the kernel to function as a hypervisor."

I wasn’t aware that there was a distinction between a Hypervisor and a ‘Type-1’ Hypervisor, but now I know so thank you for clearing that up for me.

Without GPU pass through you aren’t going to get nearly the graphics performance for something like gaming.

According to this wiki, it seems like GPU passthrough is possible with KVM if your system supports IOMMU, mine does. But it looks like you also need a separate GPU to do that, so that answers my question about is it nearly as good as dual booting.

Every game I have attempted to run has just worked and they seem to run just as good as they did in Windows, so I guess I’m lucky I don’t need to really worry about dual booting or VM’s. I was just kind of wondering if it would work if I did need it, since that seemed like it would be a lot simpler than booting into a different operating system.

What’s wrong with a VM? I set up a Win10 instance in VMM right after I switched to Linux full time 10 months ago, but I had to use it exactly once to configure the RGB on my keyboard, and haven’t had a reason to boot it up since.

From what I understood, it runs on ‘Bare Metal’ which means that it theoretically should preform just as well as if you booted into it, with the only overhead being the *nix which is minimal.

I’m not saying it’s better, I’m honestly asking because I have very little experience with it.

I used to dual boot back in the day, but that was when I was still on HDDs and the long ass boot times meant I usually just stayed in Windows if I was planning on gaming that day.

the president gets to deploy the military where ever he wishes (outside the US, posse comitatus etc). That includes invading a sovereign nation or raining missiles down on one.

That is how it’s been interpreted, it’s not actually what the founders had in mind when they wrote the constitution. They wanted congress to be a check on the presidents ‘commander in chief’ role by reserving the right to declare war for congress. If the president can still effectively declare war without a declaration of war, it’s the same as not having that check in the first place. It’s basically a loophole that presidents have been using to do illegal things

After it was either 60 or 90 days, I forget, congress gets to “review” the decision, the problem is they have no power other than financial if they wish to stop the war.

It’s 60 (with an additional 30 days to withdraw the forces) as outlined in the War Powers Resolution of 1973. This was an attempt by congress to close that loophole.

It’s true that they can cut off funding (as per Section 5c of the WPR), but congress pretty much already had that power as per the constitution and that’s not actually their only recourse. It’s still technically illegal for the president to do that (which means squat thanks to the SCOTUS) but he can be challenged through the courts for it. He could also be censured and as you mention impeached for it. None of those things are likely to happen now, but my point is Bernie is basically technically correct if not practically correct.

What an amazing fucking hypocrite you are. It’s not surprising, it’s what liberals are good at.

You are so quick to blame the Left for your Performative Pig not winning the election, but take no responsibility whatsoever for putting that piece of shit on the ballot in the first place. Before that it was a senile old man you were convinced was going to save us. You guys are the ones blaming everyone but yourselves.

You’d rather burn the country down and have people fight the fight you want

It’s you that keep on spouting the lie that Leftists are just sitting around waiting on a bunch of fucking Libs to fight for us. Literally no one has said that but you. That makes perfect sense, seeing as how the Libs haven’t done jack shit other than put ‘Vote Blue No Matter Who’ bumper stickers on their cars and going into a booth once every 4 years so they can get the coveted “I voted” badge of honor.

It makes even more sense considering the libs done everything in their power to ensure that it’s only the cops and military that actually have effective weapons to fight with. All you can do is capitulate, lick boots, and act as if inanimate objects are the problem and not the capitalist pigs you keep voting for, so of course we are just sitting around expecting you cowards to actually fight when the time comes. /s because I’m sure you need it spelled out for you.

If and when peacefully protesting inevitably fails and it comes time to defend ourselves, you can bet your ass it will be Leftists doing the fighting while the Blue losers are writing strongly worded letters to their senators and cowering in their basements.

you wouldn’t even walk to the voters booth and vote against literal nazis.

And again with the blaming everyone but yourself bullshit. FYI I and most other Leftists by an large did show up to vote for the lesser evil because unlike libs, we are willing to do harm reduction in the sort term, while still possessing the ability to look down the road and see whats coming. You guys want to take the one or two people online who didn’t vote and use them to blame the entire left for your failure to get a candidate that could actually win against literal Nazis on the ballot.

So pat yourself on the back for ‘doing your part’ by voting for a pro slavery cop instead of Hitler 2, it sure really saved all us Lefties who were waiting for our blue saviors to help us. Oh wait, it didn’t do shit.

Are you seriously unable to differentiate between someone saying that we shouldn’t be so quick to take violence off the table, and “I have a plan and the means to immediately begin using violence this second?”

Violence and Non Violence are tools, you don’t throw out your screwdriver when you get a hammer and you don’t try hammering in a screw without trying the screwdriver first.

You can prefer to resolve things peacefully while recognizing that it likely won’t work at the same time.

If someone says 'I think all people should have healthcare" do you respond with 'Go become a Doctor then!"

The far left are pussies for not taking action, and the Liberals are far worse because they are half the reason we are in this mess. Y’all want to prop up Capitalism and Corporations, this is what you get. It doesn’t matter if you asked the ruling class to play nice with the power you handed them or not, it’s not our fault you are so naive.

No one tell them about livable minimum wages, strong unions, and ‘socialist’ policies. They would rather change their goals than to implement anything that might actually work.

It’s both a stereotypical sounding “name” and a slur in the way 4chan uses it. They don’t mean a specific type of Indian person, they mean an Indian person. It’s not used like how some Brits use ‘Barry’ to mean a foolish person or Americans use ‘Karen’ to mean an entitled person.

I’m pretty sure it isn’t even actually a real name, it just sounds like it should be to racists.

By came from I mean it originated from there.

The next option is to have Trump become vice presidet (the presidential term limit doesn’t seem to apply to VP), then have the president resign and make Trump president instead, claiming that the 22nd only limits being elected twice…

That might have worked, if not for the 12th Amendment, which has this clause “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”

which might be ok with the letter of the law, but only an idiot or a tyrant would interpret it that way.

That may end up being where we run into issues. I have seen no evidence that the majority in the SCOTUS has a problem being either. And since they have lifetime appointments they are under no pressure whatsoever to do a good job. One of the main problems with our constitution.

The third option would be to have the president use the appointment clause, which is very vague about to what exact offices the president can appoint someone. It doesn’t explicitly state that the president can’t appoint someone else to the office of president.

It does actually, the Appointments Clause appears at Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution and states:

“… and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law”

“Herein” in this case refers to the Constitution itself, and it definitely does ‘provide’ for the “appointment” of the President.

I’m not at all surprised that their evil plot revolves around them not understanding the constitution, many Republicans like to pretend they love the constitution when in reality most don’t understand it, and the ones that do think they can simply ignore or change the parts that they don’t like.

Basically Trump only really has 2 options if he wants to remain in power. Have the constitution amended to remove the term limits established by the 22nd (which again isn’t likely) or do something illegal and have the SCOTUS back him up, which is sadly a little more likely.

I almost hope he tries something like that and that there are enough decent people in the Military who would actually uphold their oaths to the constitution to make such a coup impossible to sustain. That might wake people up enough to realize how they came to installing a dictator, and maybe move enough people Left that we can actually do some things to fix our broken system. It would be great if we would get rid of the Republican and Democratic parties and/or at the very least get rid of our atrocious “First past the post” voting system (along with the Electoral College) which is where a lot of the problems in our country can be traced back to.

Better yet I wouldn’t mind if we scrapped the whole “Liberal Democracy” idea altogether and wrote a new Constitution that treats all people as if they are equals and not slaves to the rich and powerful, but I wont hold my breath hoping for that one, we need to educate people first. We have been the victims of hundreds of years of propaganda (which really ramped up in the 20th century), and you can’t reverse that damage overnight.

Perhaps even less surprising, this particular racial slur apparently came from 4chan.

Fortunately, that doesn’t work either, there are several issues with that logic.

We are still (nominally) a type of Democracy. That means our ‘leaders’ must be elected. The 22nd only addresses term limits, the constitution itself spells out how the President comes into power in the first place, and that is by being elected. Nowhere is the President granted the power to appoint someone else to the office. The 25th amendment lays out who is to be president in the event that the current one is unwilling/unable to perform their duties.

Still, we are talking about if he at least wants to have the appearance of legitimacy. He’s certainly argued that he can ‘creatively interpret’ the constitution to suit his agenda. For example, despite the 14th amendment stating that “…all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” the Trump administration has tried to claim that ‘all people’ do not include people who’s parents were ‘illegal immigrants’, despite the Supreme Court precedent that it most certainly does include them.

I do have some faith that Americans would not stand for that though. That would be the final straw for many of us. If I am still around and something like that happens, I know it will be the final straw for me. I was born in a ‘free’ country, and I have no issues dying to help ensure it remains that way.

That being said there is nothing really stopping him from being the ‘de facto’ president in the case one of his lackeys gets elected and is willing to let him do so. For example if Vance were elected he could allow Trump to attend meetings and press conferences and speak on his behalf. He could be appointed an ‘advisor’ and Vance could follow his ‘advice’ every time. Hell he could allow Trump to sleep in his bed and use his toothbrush if he wanted.

Hopefully the DNC will pull it’s fucking corporate boot licking head out of its ass and put up a candidate that’s actually worth a damn for the next election, but that’s about as likely as Trump stepping down gracefully.

It’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better. I wish I believed in God, I would ask you to pray for us.

What do you define as a centrist in that context.

I’m referring to people who vote, but they claim to be the ‘reasonable’ middle ground between Democrats and Republicans. They are right wingers who don’t feel strongly one way or the other, because they are either completely ignorant about politics, or get their information from American mainstream media (pretty much the same thing).

Basically they have no real values and only know that they are satisfied with the status quo and will vote for whomever they think will maintain it. There is a lot of overlap between these pseudo-intellectuals and people who boot lick Musk.

From an European viewpoint, most democrats are right-wing politicians, some of them even far right.

I’m not a Democrat I’m a leftist, so I view it that way as well

Bernie Sanders is the only one that comes to mind that could be seen as center-left

AOC has had some pretty decent takes, but like Sanders she is a politician in America and has to play the game so who knows what she actually believes in. I believe her heart is probably in the right place at least.

And politically disinterested people don’t sound like a relevant political force…

They’re not. I wasn’t trying to imply Musk would run for office or anything. I’m just saying they are likely to be the type of people ignorant enough to continue to support him.

If there is another election and they are going to pretend it’s legitimate, Trump would have to overturn the 22nd amendment to the Constitution to be eligible to run. A constitutional amendment requires a 2/3 vote from both houses of congress, and that is not likely to happen.

That doesn’t mean the dumbass won’t try to pull some sketchy shit and I honestly wouldn’t put it past him to try.

Neither the neoliberal technologists and futurists he charmed nor MAGA are on his side any more.

This is true. The only people that will remain loyal to Mush are centrists/ politically disinterested people. I think that will turn out to be a lot of people, but not enough to really do any damage. I can see some neolibs who bought Teslas stanning for him in the hopes they will regain some of the value in their vehicles.

I’m more concerned with Musk’s wealth, he can do a lot of damage with that still. Not as much as the government can do, but not insignificant either. If he feels like he is being attacked, I can see him doing some really disgusting things to get revenge.

I’d be curious where Peter Thiel stands, the handler of Vance.

My guess is as long as Trump plays by the rules and continues to chicken out on the Tarrifs, people like Theil will be content to stay in the background, silently pulling the strings. As soon as he starts actually hurting peoples bottom lines, that’s when we will see dissent. That is almost certainly why Musk cut and ran.

If Thiel backs the impeachment Thiel will become president and that might align with their goals to dismantle democracy in the US.

I think people like Theil and Trump are equally committed to dismantling democracy (in practice if not in name), so I don’t think it matters who is running things. They have to be careful about it too, since they have propped him up and Trump is a megalomaniac who actually thinks he deserves to be where his and his base are rabidly, stupidly obedient to him.

I’d say that Musk was just as big of a part of MAGA as anyone else. Quite a bit more than most really because he ran a whole ass government agency so he and Trump could harm their political/business opponents.

Even though the Leopard ate his face, he still voted for/ promoted/ worked for/ and donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the Leopard. Musk is in no way a victim here.

Sure, he got ‘chewed up’ (I guess), but so did Hitlers supporters when they outlived their usefulness. It’s really not surprising.

Nobody on the Republican side gives a shit about him.

Name anybody (besides themselves) that they do care about? Caring about people isn’t exactly the Republicans strong suit.

I agree it’s not really a ‘turning point’ but don’t underestimate the number of people (MAGAt’s or not) who are Musk ball lickers. Those people will ‘pick a side’ and not everyone will choose Trump. They are both Fascists though, so the people end up losing either way.

IBM 386DX with a ‘turbo’ button.

I used Apple II’s in school and older “IBM” PC’s but my family never got one. I had to buy one myself once I moved out.

I remember learning to write BASIC and Logo programs in grade school. I even went to ‘computer camp’ during summer school, but that was more ‘play Oregon Trail/ Carmen San Diego and print out basic ass ascii art’ than learning.

Weirdly, after 6th grade the whole ‘computer literacy’ thing at our school quietly disappeared. In 8th grade I learned to type, on an actual typewriter. Maybe they thought the whole ‘computer’ thing was a fad, or they could have just been cheapskates. Idk.

True, but it seems like the EUs interests aligns with public interest a lot more often than it does in the U.S.

Id trade for sure. As an American, I am conditioned to settle for the lesser of two evils.

To get pedantic for a second. The title of this post is “Microsoft gives…” as if this was an altruistic act that Microsoft decided to do for some people, when the article states they did it to comply with a law.

A much better title would have been “EU Forces Microsoft to Give Users More Control:” It returns the credit to the people who deserve the credit and clarifies that it wasn’t something Microsoft did willingly.

I’m more surprised that a city in Germany didn’t switch to Linux a decade or more ago.

Late to the party is still showing up, good for them.

I live in an RV, which has a special toilet designed to use very little water.

I don’t think it would work even if I could afford to retrofit my bathroom, as water pressure is often an issue when traveling.

Most likely? Unfortunately most people either don’t care about software freedom, don’t know about it, are actually scared of it, or just don’t have the time or know how to switch. Couple that with the fact that Microsoft and Apple are determined to lock it down and the trend seems clear to me.

Ofc I would Love to be wrong, I just don’t have much faith in people knowing or caring about what is in their best interest.