saintPirelli

I use `nano YYYYMMDD.md`.

That sounds like a bummer, everything was working just fine pretty much out-of-the-box, INCLUDING printer, scanner and WIFI, which are/were notoriously frustrating to set up on a Linux machine.

Just last week I wrote a blog post about installing eOS on my SO's parents PC. They are not technical at all yet they have had (close to) no problem with switching from Windows to Linux thanks to eOS.

Is there a name for that feeling of not having enough time to learn everything you want to learn? I have that pretty constantly. Other than that I'm doing great.

I'm saying that knowing a right should be absolute and - for example - not knowing how to enforce this right for everyone, are not mutually exclusive.

I'm basically saying that the answer to the question of "Is murder wrong" should be a boolean value, not a float. Once it's a float, you open the door to all kinds of nasty thoughts arguing about where to draw the line.

Are handicapped people worthy of killing? What about long-term unemployed? What about the opressors - like rich people? Homosexuals? There have literally been people arguing and executing all of these appalling thoughts in the last century and I would argue beneath it all lies a deadly relativism that says "Of course there is a universal right to live, well, unless you are a ... of course."

If I declare a right an "absolute" right I do not aim to answer any of the questions you posed, those are all good questions that need to be carefully considered, but none of them render the "over-simplified" right to live any less morally justified or desirable.

We can talk about edge cases when we agree on the base principles. A principle isn't automatically invalid because it has hard-to-answer edge cases. This is faulty logic.

> For example, I don't think my freedom of speech should trump Cloudflare's or Voxility's right to freedom of association.

Right, but those only produce a conflict in a very specific case and your right to free speech should be defended by your government/peers regardless of where you do the caching for your blog (or whatever).

I have a huge issue with this modern relativist approach, because it leads to the situation where - instead of acknowledging that there are in fact absolute rights - we constantly debate where _the line_ is.

I think the boldest example of why this is bad is the right to live. In my view, this is an absolute right. "But what if it's a mass murderer?" - "But what if they are terminally ill and are suffering?" - "But what if they are so heavily handicapped that... ?" Adding _ifs_ and _buts_ to a right that should be absolute leads down a very dark path, because _the line_ will be a constant subject of discussion.

I think we would do ourselves a favor to just outright declare some rights to be absolute (as we did before and seem to have forgotten).

I might make an "emergency bathrooms" list for my city, because that's something everybody actually needs from time to time, fast.

For the same reason your not sending html-files via email when you want to share a website I suppose.

`Error joining` when I want to join chats. And I really have strong opinion about them notifications ;)

That looks really cool, I would absolutely use this if I was using Twitter. One question: Do you cut the text after precisely 280 chars and then fit the rest in to the next tweet, or did you implement a "smarter" solution (like cutting it at the last space and adding "1/4" to indicate the length of the thread or adding an ellipsis or whatever)?