I'm one of those mythical Linux users who has been using it for years but has little to no idea what's going on behind the scenes or under the hood.

In my time using it, I've sort of passively gleaned that certain things are controversial, but I don't necessarily know why. It's also hard for me to know if these are just general intra-community drama/bikeshedding, or if these are actually big, meaningful issues.

If you're someone who's in the know, here's your chance to lay out a Linux controversy in a way that's understandable by someone like me, who can't tell you why people always make "GNU/Linux" jokes for some reason whenever people mention "Linux."

Here are some things that have pinged for me as controversial in my time using Linux:

• Unity
• Canonical
• Deepin
• systemd
• Arch
• GNOME
• Manjaro
• Kali
• Rust in the kernel
• elementaryOS
• Linus Torvalds
• Snaps
• Wayland
• Something about a university being banned from contributing to Linux
• NVIDIA drivers
• Package managers vs. Snaps/Flatpaks

There are certainly more -- these are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

Replies don't have to be limited to the above topics. I'm interested in getting the lay of the land about any Linux controversy.

IMPORTANT

This topic is intended for learning, not bickering.

• Please try to explain a controversy as fairly as you can.
• Please try to not re-ignite a flame war about a specific controversy.

It's fine to discuss these in good faith, but I do not want this topic to become yet another Linux battleground online. There are plenty of those already!

I have two giant drawers right now that are complete rats’ nests. Cables of every kind and type, all mixed together. You can’t tell where one cable ends and another begins.

It is at the point where I recently needed a cable that I know that I have, but it was easier and less stressful to just order a new one than try to find it in the mess.

Ideally, I’d have cables that are neatly organized, not tangled together, easily identifiable, and space efficient, but I honestly have no idea how to make this happen.

Anyone have any tips?

This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant US political content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

This is an inherently political thread; please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

A while ago some of the keys on my Dell XPS laptop started working poorly, they were only registering the presses half of the time or if I pushed them really hard. I tried removing the keycaps and cleaning the keys on the inside, but to no avail. Well, I thought, that means it's time to get a new laptop. So I was choosing the next laptop to get. One of the options I considered was the Framework laptop, which is supposed to be super repairable - I mean, if only I could just replace my laptop keyboard, I wouldn't have to buy a whole new laptop just because of a few broken keys!

Then I thought about it again. I realized that a repairable laptop is only useful if you actually try to repair your laptop, which I've never done. So, I looked it up, and turns out Dell, while obviously not as easily repairable as Framework, has very well-detailed official service manuals as well!

Two weeks of waiting for a Chinese copycat keyboard from AliExpress and three hours of work later, I finally have a fully working laptop! Turns out it isn't hard at all to replace a broken keyboard - but I'm still very proud of myself for doing it, mostly for even deciding to do it instead of just turning a fully functional laptop into e-waste as I would've done otherwise. I was also really surprised that Dell laptops are that easy to fix (though they don't officially sell replacement parts to consumers), since it's known to be a company that makes a ton of money on expensive support offerings.

I don't really know what the lesson of this post is, I just wanted to share this small achievement with y'all.

Listened to Craig Ferguson on his podcast "Joy" talking with Diedrich Bader, last known for playing Jethro in the Beverly Hillbillies movie (which flopped).

The most interesting part was their discussion about gaining and losing that "Hollywood aura" - they agreed it was like someone handing you a magic hat, and while you're wearing it, you're the most special person in the room and everyone wants your attention. And then the hat goes away and you're back to being very ordinary and in at lot of cases, become an actor somewhat desperately looking for more work. Which is why they attend so many parties and awards. It's not so much about the glamor, its about getting a chance to network and try to find a new gig with the producers and directors and financiers in attendance.

Bader asked Ferguson if there was anyone he interviewed that gave him that sense of awe, someone who still wore that magic hat? Nope. Ferguson said after years of doing his Late Night show they were all just people. New "star", old "star", none of them really made a big impression.

Although he DID say when Sean Connery shook his wife's hand her chest visibly blushed and Craig asked her later what that was all about. She said, "Well it doesnt do it for YOU but THAT was Sean Connery!" Pretty funny.

But it was interesting to hear some insiders talking about other insiders the way they did. They're all just actors looking to stay employed. Which makes sense when you see an A list actor in a B movie and wonder why they took that role. Probably had bills to pay, that's why.

MLMs = "multi-level marketing" companies, which is essentially a euphemism for "pyramid scheme." These are flat out illegal in many countries, but are, notably, quite legal in the US.

They used to be huge in the 2010s, but I don't hear much about them anymore (granted, I haven't been on social media since 2016). I know several IRL people who got into them, and I even regrettably bought products from some of them before I really understood what they were or how they worked.

I recently read Hey, Hun by Emily Lynn Paulson who was toward the top of the pyramid at Rodan + Fields.

In the book she mentions that algorithmic changes from social media companies ended up downgrading a lot of MLM postings, which cut off oxygen to the cycles of recruitment that these companies rely on. For example, Rodan + Fields moved to an affiliate model in 2024.

I'm curious about what the MLM landscape looks like right now.

• Are MLMs still common?
• For those of you on social media, do you still get recruitment and sales messages?
• Have they changed their tactics or models?

People don't have to limit responses to just those questions -- consider this a general MLM discussion topic where anything related to them is fair game.