"Wir machen trotzdem einfach weiter, weil eh jeder weiß, dass wir korrupt sind und es trotzdem keine Folgen hat."
kakistocracy
We should really normalise the use of that classic term...
Aber steht Deutschland wirklich am Abgrund
Nö, aber wir laufen schnellstmöglich darauf zu, während die Hirnbefreiten an den Stammtischen jubeln und die polituische Führung sich ob all der zukünftigen Zuwendungen durch und Posten bei der Fossilindustrie die Hände reibt.
"Es ist nicht besonders sinnvoll, zu sagen, wir erhöhen hier in Deutschland einseitig die Standortkosten und freuen uns dann sogar, wenn Flugverbindungen gestrichen werden, weil die Flugzeuge dann woanders eingesetzt werden, entweder in anderen europäischen Ländern oder auch beispielsweise in Asien." So werde das Klima nicht gerettet.
Genau! Wenn wir die Inlandsflüge reduzieren, verschiebt sich der Verkehr nicht etwa auf die klimafreundlichere Schiene, sondern der innerdeutsche Verkehr findet ab jetzt in Asien statt! Wann versteht ihr Idioten endlich die überlegene CDU-Logik?
Gesetzliche KrankenVersicherung...
But that doesn't matter! Join the crusade!! AI is either the devil incarnate or our lord and savior! No in-between (no sanity in particular) allowed.
And as long as you have still not gone insane and argue rationally the bombardment of at least one pro-, one anti-AI post/article about Linux per day has to continue...
Faschismus ist eine Gefahr für die offene Gesellschaft UND die Wirtschaft.
Aber ist Faschismus auch eine Gefahr für den Geldbeutel derer, die die Entscheidungen treffen? Tja...
When something looks like satire but is real...
it doesn’t mean that everyone who dislikes the EU is a MAGA republican or Russian bot
No, but 99 out of 100 times someone disliking the EU and then whining about "bottle caps" and "paper straws" got their talking points from one of those bots directly or from one of the far-right culture-war bullshit influencers who get their instructions from the same source. Because that's one of their popular topics, which is not surprising given that any actually substantial criticism of the EU would need more context, basic political understanding and in-depth reasoning than what those propaganda tools just pushing simpke narratives allow.
When config files change with an update pacman writes the new one as a .pacnew file instead of overwriting the existing one. That's always an issue with updates on config files (although one less severe on slow updating distros). Do you keep the old config to keep your changes intact while ignoring new default options that should be in there or do you replace the old config with a recent one but risk using manual edits?
pacdiff basically just searches for .pacnew files and then queries you what to do with each.
You can define a viewer via a DIFFPROG= variable (I simply use vim -d because that's already my editor of choice but the package pulls diffutils as a dependency so just diff works, too) and compare the new default config file with the existing one side-by-side (with differences highlighted), so you can either copy your personal edits to the new one or copy additional or changed default options to your old one, whatever is easier. After that you have the option to dismiss/delete the .pacnew file or rename it to replace the old one.
PS: pacdiff is part of the pacman-contrib package. That package also provides checkupdates.
Running pacman -Syu updates your package list to the recent one, then updates all your outdated packages. You are not actually supposed to update the list, then abort the update of packages or just update some of them because Archlinux always assumes up-to-date systems (see: unsupported partial upgrades). So pacman should not be used to just check for available updates without updating. That's where checkupdates comes in, simulating pacman -Syu without actually touching your system and just getting a list of available updates.
PPS: the AUR has a similiar aur-check-updates tools to do the same for AUR packages.
"If flywheels seem like an exotic energy storage solution, that’s largely because they have generally been relegated to niche applications. A spokesperson for Qnetic told pv magazine USA that grid-connected flywheel pioneer Beacon Power deployed 400 of its 100 kW (25 kWh) units at two utility sites in New York and Pennsylvania between 2011 and 2014 to provide fast-responding frequency regulation. Each location had 200 units with a nameplate capacity of 20 MW (5 MWh), and both are still providing frequency regulation service and generating revenue."
I would assume that flywheels are exotic because their niche (short- to mid-term storage, quick reaction times) wasn't much needed so far in a grid dominated by non-renewables. This will probably change in the future.
But for the same reason I don't get all that talk about competing with lithium-ion batteries. Flywheels don't really fit the same category as batteries. And lithium-ion batteries in particular are not well suited for grid-level storage anyway. Their benefit at the moment is basically just availability because that's the type of battery that was produced and optimised at scale for –at least– the last decade.

