I thought it was already supposed to be in kernel 6.10? What happened then? https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.10-Merging-NTSYNC

It is really great, even with a NVIDIA. Never understood the complaints about arch, but maybe I have Endeavour to thank for that

It appears I got things mixed up, it is a California law that comes into effect next year.

Guess what has happened in the EU?

That is exactly the issue with algorithm-driven social media : they are the majority in their reality. It is distorted because of the algorithm, but nevertheless it is the world they are living in.

Couldn’t you just use the yubikey like normal if you have physical access to it instead of copying it ?

Tactics against the far right? What tactics? He has done absolutely nothing against the rise of the far right and helped it so many times.

Hell he has become more extremist every year himself.

What works against the far is known, we have already done it in the past : everything done by the CNR after the war. A social safety net. He has done nothing but destroying it, not only has he failed to fight the far right, he is actively enabling it.

There are probably a hundred time more Java developers than rust developers. I think that is the whole point of choosing Java.

If what you said was true there wouldn’t be any companies outside of like the caymans islands. Taxation is not the only thing a company look at when choosing where to go. Sure obviously you can’t tax at 100%, but we are currently way lower than we used a few decades ago, so we totally can raise it (actually just go back to what it was even just 10 years ago).

As for the retirement age of 60, you say it is impossible yet it was the retirement age in France until like 15 years ago. Since then we dramatically reduced the taxation on companies and capital gains, and slightly increased the age of retirement. That is to say it is absolutely possible and does not demand big systemic changes, only some adjustments on a few variables.

Also the retirement age until 6 months ago was 62, and projections for the next decades showed the system would be making benefits for a few years, then deficit, then back to benefits later in the century, while keeping everything (tax level, retirement age) the same. The choice was to reduce taxes on companies and capital gains, and raise retirement age, which would end up costing more in like 30 years from now than if we kept the same age (not even talking about not reducing taxation on that point)

We are, as a society, extremely rich. It is just not well distributed thus people think we don’t have money for this or that.

Taxing more means more revenue for the system, thus reaching equilibrium. It’s recurring income so it doesn’t move the problem into the futur.

What the government did however, that is moving the issue down the line, as it does reduce cost now, but in the future it will cost more than if they didn’t do anything. As usual, absolutely no foresight whatsoever, lies upon pile of lies.

We produce more than enough for everyone to be above poverty, to retire at 60, to have free Healthcare. However choices were made so instead of that we have a few super billionaires, people living in the street, etc etc

The idea would simply be to stop giving so many taxes cuts to companies.

In tenace we recently raised the retirement age because according to the government there was not enough money, the usual bullshit.

Why bullshit you ask? Because it is the very same government that removed three times as much as what they said was missing from pension funds in taxes on companies. They also reduced taxes on capital gains, to bring it to a lower level as what someone middle class would pay on their salary, part of which goes to finance pensions.

We have the money, we always have, it is just a matter of choosing where to put it. Most government of the West decided to put it in the hands of the few richest.

And he owes around 5k€ in back rent! That is proper justice for once.

She didn’t resign, the president removed her. She wanted to stay, but the president wouldn’t let her because then she would beat the previous record of 49.3 by a single prime minister.

I mean, worst case Facebook disappears or become a pay only service. I am 100% ok with that, it has been proven times and times again that society, children, young adults, older adults, democracies would be far better off without it.

Fascism and democracy are on a spectrum, and we definitely aren’t as close to democracy as I would like.

Depending on where you draw the line on the spectrum you can consider France is fascist, or in a pre-fascist state.

The executive is very powerful, to the point that the minister of justice is currently undergoing trial, and keeps his position. Of course he is judged by a literal two speed justice system, by a special court reserved for members of the executive branch.

In France, the parliament can’t propose new laws except for 1 day a year for each parliamentary group (essentially one group per political party with more than a certain amount of seats).

Only the government can, and it is the government that sets the order of the day. The parliament can however modify the law proposed, but thanks to the famous article 49.3 the government can just ignore those.

This is essentially how it works in France… And it’s bad. The president gets elected with 20% of the votes and then he has a majority in the parliament (relative majority for this term) but it means the parliament is useless. Look up article 49.3 of the constitution and its uses by the current prime minister.

Why don’t they just raise rates on the companie’s internet subscription?

2 dollars of progress for 85 years… How much has productivity risen during that time?

Once again they are so close yet so far from a solution : Just reverse the taxation schemes on planes and trains.

In France at least, airplane fuel isn’t taxed, electricity is. Train ticket have 20% sales tax, airplane tickets don’t. Just reverse that and see how that changes things.