Quoting: vipor29yea that is very confusing you go from 100 down to 57.

That part is fine, it's just the 57th subversion 450 vs. the 100th. subversion of 440.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Like with DXVK, we might even see gamers on Windows using it in future. Yes, that's actually a thing and there's many more like it as it can boost performance on Windows too for older games.

Now that's interesting!

*edit*
Googling for this reddit link, I found another nice one. :D

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/hgrcly/you_may_have_heard_of_playing_windows_games_on/ [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: robvvCurrently playing The Bard's Tale IV. A really-good Skyrim-like RPG with many puzzles and good battles!

Never heard this comparison...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CFWhitmanI recently went through Portal and Portal 2. I have started The Talos Principle, but to me it is not as engaging as the Portal games.

Storywise? Because some of the puzzles are soo clever! If you want more Portal, "Portal Stories: Mel" is something I can't stop recommending. In hard mode, it's... well... hard. And so satisfying.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

A Normal Lost Phone. Too much message, too little game, but ok, it was cheap and not bad.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm all fine with respectfully disagreeing...

Quoting: Guestremoving the power inequality from the system won't remove racism, but it's a bloody good start

... and won't even try to find better closing words than these.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library GuyAll that stuff is irrelevant to this case. What's relevant is, Chrome OS has a significant amount of desktop-like market share

This seems to be mainly a US thing to me. According to netmarketshare.com, their significant amount is way below that of Linux. (It doesn't even fit on the first page [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestRacism obviously has overtones of unwanted, unacceptable behaviour. As a thought exercise however: if someone has prejudicial thinking, but does not carry out discrimination, are they racist?

Yes. Racism is a way of thinking (which often leads to a way of acting, of course).

Quoting: GuestOn the flip side, if someone carries out discrimination but are not consciously aware of it, are they racist?

(Discrimination base on colour and stuff you mean, I guess.) Yes, I think so, and yes, that might mean that many people are racist which would strongly and in good conscience deny it. (I'm not talking about those "I'm not a racist, but..." people here!)

Quoting: GuestAnd then, let's go a step further. If someone is discriminating against another based upon ethnic or racial grounds, what if it's because they've been oppressed are are looking to restore some balance? I mean, if some has been a slave because of the colour of their skin, and then chooses to stay away from others resembling their oppressors, are they then being racist?

That's a tough question I don't have clear answer for. What would be yours?
But, adressing the elephant in the room: People of colour can be racists, too.

Quoting: GuestIt's not quite so simple to resolve such things in any kind of short terms. This makes heavy reading and discussion on the matter quite critical, and why, in my view, one cannot simply divorce racism from power.

I don't say it's simple, I'm saying mixing everything into a single term is often not the answer, and in this case, it isn't either. Why not talk about racist people (people thinking their group would be superior based on their idea of a "race") and a racist system (many racist people oppressing other people they consider being of another "race")? It avoids the problems with mixing all into one term, like giving different terms to two people thinking exactly the same (racist) thing of one another.

Cramming too much in a word makes conversation harder, not easier.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI really should stay away from such hot topics, but....

I'm happy when there's someone able to actually discuss stuff. The worst about DrMcCoy here was his attitude about his favorite definition, like "I'm right, everybody seeing it differently is wrong and has to inform themselves, ok boomer, I'm out (but I'm still right)". (And yes, I'm still surprised and disappointed to read something like that from him.)

Quoting: Guestanyway, racism from a dictionary definition description can be tweaked, but unfortunately it's actually devoid of meaning without the social context to give it power. Race itself is a social construct, with no basis in science or fact itself, and so racism becomes something only with definition of society giving it power.

Without backing power therefore, I would argue that prejudice is a better word than racism. Anyone can be prejudiced based on differences in the amount of melanin in one's skin, and there can be historical good and bad reasons behind that no doubt, but no you can't really be racist if you've no power to enforce that prejudice on others.

Basically, any discussion about who is racist or not has to include and factor in the power and hierarchy dynamics of social groups.

That way of defining racism would lead to absurd consequences: If the racist side would lose its power, they would suddenly stop being racist, despite feeling the same way based on the same construct.

In my opinion, we should differentiate between say racist persons, racist ideas and a racist system. The latter obviously cannot be in place without power, but the racist person with racist ideas stays the same no matter if gaining, losing or never having any powers. They can be racist alone on an island.

It seems to me some people are trying to put too much into a single word, which just needs some more words. (I met the same with the word "peace", which according to some doesn't mean the absence of war, or violence, but seemingly free cake to everybody as well.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DrMcCoyWhite supremacists aren't powerless, they have structural power in society.

... and if they wouldn't, thinking the very same wouldn't be racism?
Sorry, this is nonsense.
Racism is a way of thinking and while it's obviously more dangerous with power, the thinking stays the same without, and deserves the very same name.

And no, I'm not getting some books to find something to prove your point. If you find anything that says that racism is not racism without power, feel invited to cite it.

PS: "ok boomer" is by far not the quality of messages I'm used to from you.

View this comment - View article - View full comments