It makes sense to advertise the modem as reliable given that there are no phones at all with reliable modems under GNU/Linux. The absence of such an advertisement means the modem is almost certainly not reliable.

THE LINUX PHONE YOU’VE BEEN WAITING FOR

Makes no mention of a reliable modem so it’s certainly not the Linux phone I’ve been waiting for. What good is 32GB of RAM in a phone if I can’t use it as a phone?

4K/UHD discs need to phone home in order to get decryption keys on a per disc basis

Is that true for hardware players? I’ve only seen people talking about software players like Power DVD having to get keys from the Internet.

4k players

Are you talking about software players or 4k decks?

there is simply too much at stake

OUR MONAYS!1!!!

They are both perfectly fine editors but they don’t hold a candle to a proper IDE

I’m not sure what you mean by “proper” in this context. Every IDE I’ve ever used has seemed like a child’s toy compared to Emacs. An annoying child’s toy with cracks and sharp edges.

I also want to play some games that go beyond the production values of SuperTuxKart and Battle for Wesnoth.

Try 0 A.D. or FreeOrion.

Have you considered using GNU Emacs? Or even shudder vim?

There are plenty of free software games available: https://libregamewiki.org/

I want closed source apps

Ewww

Wrong sub. Perhaps you want !windows@sopuli.xyz ?

it was Purism’s choice to start their own Debian-based PureOS instead of just helping develop PostmarketOS or another existing OS for less money

PureOS already existed for Purism’s laptops. Purism didn’t start PureOS for the phone.

was Purism’s choice to start Phosh instead of just helping develop GNOME Shell

It was the GNOME Shell folks themselves who said not to use GNOME Shell on mobile because “it’s a trap”.

which Phosh appears to be heavily based on

phosh was written from scratch.

deleted by creator

That red spot next to Ukraine makes me ashamed of my auburn hair :-(

Edit: curious why the downvotes?

NO U!

LOL

Explain how these are different. Otherwise they aren’t.

ROFL

“biological duty” refers to the inherent functions or purposes that living organisms are considered to have, often relating to their SURVIVAL and reproduction.

Right so this is a different concept to the definition of “duty” you gave previously. So again, we’re talking about different things.

This is the same answer I’ve always provided.

Which isn’t an answer to my question. I asked about duty, not about “biological duty”.

a task or action that someone is required to perform

This I can understand.

“human biological duties”

This, which you’ve made up, I don’t understand. It doesn’t make sense to me. “Biological duties” seems like a contradiction in terms. In fact it sounds ridiculous. And there’s no logical connection between the definition of “duty” you gave above and this undefined term “human biological duties” which you’ve introduced. If it’s in line with your previous expositions about family, then it is in fact distinct from the definition of “duty” you gave and incoherent.

Regardless, whatever it is you’re talking about doesn’t seem like what the authors of the article were talking about or what I was asking about. So again, consistently, it seems like we’re talking about different things. In fact it’s looking more and more like you’re just reaching and trying to shoe-horn the subject that you want to talk about into this discussion.

Firstly, you haven’t given a definition of “duty”.

Secondly, you just said it’s not a duty, now you’re saying it is a duty. Please sort your shit out.

You must get that people are here to talk about some politicial commentary, and you’re saying “well, I’m not convinced in the concept of duty”. It’s like turning up to an astrinomy club and saying “you can’t prove these stars aren’t a dream of mine!”.

You seem to be a bit off on one. Your analogy doesn’t make sense. Someone posted an opinion article which contained a statement that I questioned. Other people responded to my questioning. Discussion ensued. Seems pretty normal and expected to me. It seems like the misunderstanding is on your part.

it’s not so much a “duty,”

All of:

1. the statement in the posted article
2. my question about that statement
3. the response to my question
4. my response which you originally replied to
5. my question, which you quoted in the comment I’m replying to here

were about duty.

Whatever you’re talking about, it isn’t an answer to any of my questions because you’re not talking about duty.