MediumGray

Man, that guy does not know how to fell a tree

Pretty sure they meant to reply to another image in the thread here but messed it up.

What I mean is that, lacking any other info, communist does not automatically equal authoritarian. There is a tragic amount of overlap between those two Ven diagram circles but it is not an intrinsic thing is all I'm pointing out. Of course I know nothing about the specifics of this situation in particular, and I'm not so arrogant as to talk as though I do. I'm just making a general point.

I think this scenario highlights the difference between communists and tankies. Tankies are a subset of communists (or at least claim to be) but not all communists are tankies.

My understanding is that not saving window size and placement is a limitation of Wayland right now (for security reasons that it's trying to address rather than ignore like xorg I think?). I think it's something that's planned to be added eventually, but who knows when that might be. It is frustrating in the meantime I agree.

Take all this with a large grain of salt of course, I am by no means an expert on the matter and am just repeating what I read when I looked into it myself a year ago or so.

Well, we know that they're typically referred to as male (as far as I know at least), so perhaps they're all transmasc?

I thought that part of it at least was that much like existing life has a harder time breaking down these mirror proteins the same is true in reverse. So any life that was mirror protein based would struggle with consuming and gaining energy. As such the current protein chirality basically won by being first to market. That being said I don't see why that would hamper reverse chirality photosynthesis, and I don't really know what I'm talking about so perhaps your suggestion is more convincing after all.

It is terribly worded, so it's unnecessarily confusing and unclear, but it means 'nobody says (or does) anything', thus indicating that the second action is unprompted.

Ya, a bit, I guess. I just don't think talking down to someone is ever really a good way to communicate (unless the interaction is in fact adversarial and that's the whole point). That being said I suppose I also get that sometimes it's desirable to express exasperation, even if it's not constructive or polite.

Ok, so I don't disagree with anything you're saying, and I think your point is very valid and worth saying, but why do you feel the need to start it by being condescending? I'm honestly curious because I feel like I've been seeing this a lot on Lemmy.

Sperad