96VXb9ktTjFnRi

LibreOffice is forked long ago from the extremely corporate OpenOffice effort, which in turn originated from the non-open-source Star Office. Not all FOSS comes from enthusiasts.

That's a fair point. I would also be very much in favor of governments subsidizing certain FOSS projects. There's a lot of work to be done, and people certainly deserve to be paid for it too.

FOSS software will win eventually. It may take time, but if good FOSS software is being built by enthusiasts then a time will come where proprietary software fucks up. And when it does, FOSS is ready to take it's place. And as soon as FOSS has become a standard in some field, why would there ever be a need to go back to proprietary?

TIL Tetris is from USSR. Aswell as that the pieces in it are called tetrominos.

Here in the Netherlands our house of representatives has 150 seats and they're filled by 15 parties, the biggest of whom has 37 seats, the second 25. People sometimes suggest that political fragmentation makes things more complicated, because usually at least 3 or 4 parties are needed to form a coalition. I don't really think it matters because I look at it this way: there are different views on things in society and compromises need to be found one way or another, it's where this takes place that's different. In one case it's on the conference of 1 or 2 big parties, in the other case it happens in parlement/government where the many small parties meet. The benefit of a many-party system is that people actually got a choice, if you're on the left and don't like what a particular party is doing, you can pick another leftwing party. You don't have that option in a 2-party system, you'll probably stick with your party despite everything you don't like about it. Here, if a party really fucks up, they're done for, a party can get 20% one election and 1% the next one. The system is more dynamic. At the same time, the actual governments usually have an overlap, like there will be different coalitions, but our center-right party has been in the coalition for over a decade now. There may be a certain charm to knowing that every other election a completely new set of people forms the government, but that also has many downsides I think. There'll be little continuity, republicans undo everything democrats have done and in 4 years we'll see the reverse. Haven't heard any really convincing arguments against political fragmentations. It's just the path towards it that may be difficult if you're in a 2 party system, because as soon as you go third party, you're hurting your side of the spectrum. What would be helpfull is if it would happen on both sides simultaneously. Can't you setup a structure where people from both sides would together commit to voting third-party?

Sure, YOU voted dems anyway, but not everyone did. And it's those others that didn't that you need to consider if you want to win elections. Is it that they didn't vote Kamala because she is female and belongs to a minority? Honestly it's not unlikely that that is the case. Obviously it shouldn't matter, but it still seems like it does.

A very particular type of prison too

Yes you name important reasons, also there's migration both legal and illegal. Legal migration also from within Europe, for example there are quite a lot of Polish homeless people here. Often they came here to work, but they lost their job and the housing that was part of the job, and they stick around for a while, thinking to turn things round, but things get worse when they start drinking. Often their best chance is to go back to Poland, because there they have social security rights, which they don't have here. But they feel shame to go back and face their defeat. It's heartbreaking sometmes, not very proud of how my country treats foreign workers..

There are some schizophrenic homeless people, but even more people with bad tempers, anti social personality traits, that get themselves into fights all the time. I often need to remind myself and others, that it's those people that often need help the most. Some people only want to help those that are very sympathetic, and greatfull. But those will make it any way, everyone is willing to help them. It's the ones with the bad tempers and the short fuses that need your help most, because most people are unwilling to look beyond it.

Money can't buy you happiness. But stress due to lack of money destroys people. Working as a volunteer at a homeless shelter has taught me that atleast here in the Netherlands quite some of them stay homeless not because there are no options to get of the street, but because with these options comes all the stress of having to pay the bills. That goes to show how rough it must be to live with financial stress, because living on the street itself is terribly rough, and still some prefer it.