First, no he did not. He released information relating to government officials engaging in misconduct. Hillary Clinton had been a government official for a long time, Trump had not. Of course youre more likely to get that kind of information on her and not him.

But even if he had, having a political allegiance is not a crime punishable by prison as far as I know.

So you’re not a fan of national self determination then?

So I was responding to the parent statement, he said when there’s disinformation democracy doesn’t work. Well in order to avoid disinformation, you need strong control of information flow. That sounds a lot like a dictatorship. The people you vote for control what you know about them, that’s not democracy. So if democracy doesn’t work because people lie, and democracy doesn’t work if information is controlled, then democracy doesn’t work, right? Interestingly, he confirmed lower in the thread that he does not believe in democracy.

I’m with you, all news is controlled propaganda. I don’t follow any of it as a result. It is sad, but all we can do is try to live in the world we are in. I don’t let it get me depressed, I just carry on.

An anarchy is an environment where no one controls the application of force. Information has nothing to do with it.

Seems to me you don’t like democracy and only use it as a means to an end.

Well, that’s dismissive. You don’t think that these people are reacting to genuine concerns they have? Not even some of them, some of their concerns?

In an environment where nobody controls the information, people will lie. If democracy doesn’t work when information flows freely, doesn’t that mean democracy doesn’t work?

Sure, but that’s not how it starts usually.

When people feel ignored in a democratic country, they begin to feel like the democracy they live in is a sham or that democracy itself doesn’t work.

Votes like this aren’t necessarily about “we need a different direction” and more about desperation and/or anger. They want to show the elites of their country that they still have the power, they want to cost them something for treating the population like it’s there to be harvested from, they want to shake up the status quo at all cost.

They want to prove to themselves that their vote still matters.

Letting it get to this point is really bad governance. Once you get here, either they win, or they don’t. And of they don’t, most of the people who support them have their suspicions confirmed, they don’t live in a democracy, they voted and didn’t get what they want, again. This creates a division that is difficult to come back from.

Fighting poverty and corruption since 1992.

These guys, the very guys that liberated their country, have managed to lose so much political will that now they’re stooping to buying votes.

Removed by mod

How does ascribing blame to the aggressor, the accurate assessment BTW and I agree with you, make parading this dude around in a t shirt and cargo pants not disgusting?

The power structure will protect itself. This is why you must always view government as your enemy.

Did he say anything bad about that guy? Try harder.

100%, it’s honestly disgusting at this point watching the western power structure parade this war around. It’s off putting, no wonder people’s apetite for it has dried up.

How so? The parties they’re competing against are incumbents, and often, there are laws preventing them from campaigning. If anything they’re at a disadvantage policitally, and yet they’re winning. Obviously, what they’re offering is popular for some reason.

Fuck yeah thanks man

Well, they win because they get votes, what is it that they’re unhappy with that they’re drawn to the potential leadership of these parties? I’d start with that. These are democracies, so these parties can’t gain power unless they offer the citizenry of their countries something they want.

Yeah you’re right it’s refresh databases, my bad.

I have never, once, run into an issue due to rolling release. I have never once read the news before updating. I’ve never had an update on arch break my system, never.

“Bleeding edge” is beta or alpha releases, people running those are the guinea pigs. All packages in default arch repositories are release versions, intended for use by users.

It is always expected to update your system periodically, no matter what distro or even software you’re using.

None of these are actual problems

Yes, and I argue that this is true of new users as well.

normally just works

Yes, very user friendly

excellent wiki to get answers.

Yes. All users of systems, new, intermediate, advanced, and of any system, including windows and Mac, google stuff sometimes and look for information. This is probably one of the most important components for any software, the more easy it is to find information the better it will be. You can’t find anything up to date on Ubuntu anymore, you’re in a forum with a post from 2008 following outdated information.

expected to read the wiki

yes, when using software it is expected that at some point you’ll want to look at documentation, so documentation needs to be detailed, accurate and up to date.

This problem you’re talking about with packages A B and C and wrong versions and stuff, I’ve never run into it. I’m sure it can happen, but I’ve never seen it. I have run into it on Debian based systems, every time I’ve tried to run one for a few months I get broken dependencies and stuff due to mismatched versions. Basically every problem after your edit applies to all package managers, forcing yes on dialogs (the “y” in -Sy) is always dangerous, “apt purge” and “apt autoremove” to clean cache and remove unneeded dependencies, this stuff isn’t unique to pacman, and again, I’ve only ever seen it on Debian, it’s theoretically possible on arch but a guarantee on Debian that you’ll run into these problems.

But we are getting lost in the weeds. Give someone an endeavorOS installer and a Linux Mint installer, will there be a noticable difference in ease of use? No, there won’t, generally what determines user friendliness is the DE. The few things they could get stuck on are in the terminal, that applies regardless of the distro, and the big difference is the package manager, and like I’ve said, I’ve never had pacman break, I’ve had apt break something every time I’ve run it for a few months.

The wiki just likes to make the details available. Installation of nextcloud is as easy as pacman -S nextcloud

You’re comparing a simple install guide with the entire detailed documentation of a package. of course the package docs are going to have more details.

Ignoring details is not the same as being user friendly. Having a bunch of corpo marketing pictures of slightly above average people smiling on video chat in your installation docs does not make something user friendly. Is this really the metric we are going by, how little information is in the documentation?

Dude thank you, someone who actually tried what I’m recommending weighing in.