Do you care about internet points on Lemmy of all places?

Not particularly. I agree with you on that; I assume not many people care about them, but when someone gives me a button to push for things that don’t add to conversations, like, say, repeated instances of aggressive ignorance and lies about what an article consists of, it’s really not a lot of effort to push it, so I’m going to keep doing that 'til either you stop with the bullshit or I get bored.

A contradiction. I repeat: I either verify stuff myself or outsource that verification to a source I can trust. I’m surprised you don’t do that too, or put it in the bad light for whatever reason. Maybe that’s why you have a long conversation defending questionable sources. I decided not to trust them. It’s more of an effort than blindly consuming whatever someone posts.

A lie. There is no evidence that the source is questionable. There is abundant evidence that they are a real journalistic source (remember when I linked you some? Those were good times).

You decided not to trust the source based on nothing. This is a stupid thing to do. You decided to comment on it anyway, with no knowledge or interest in discovering the truth. That is a harmful thing to do.

I’m going to keep having this conversation because you’ve decided to…what are we at now, quintuple-down on this? We’re far past the realm of where most Lemmy apps will even display comment chains this long. It’s just you, me, and anyone bored enough to dig into a slap fight about how difficult it is for you to read.

I mean first let me thank you for speaking on behalf of all of Lemmy. Super kind of you.

The rest of this is a lovely set of excuses, but this…

In a polarising context of the Israeli-Palestinian war we already had a lot of fake or complicated stories and as I’m not myself able to verify each piece myself, I prefer big news media I can somehow trust because they do verification for me.

I really can’t resist the bait there.

No one is asking you to verify every piece of information you read. In this polarizing context of the world we live in, you should at least try to make an effort to know what you’re talking about before you comment, though, or you’re adding to that misinformation you seem so keen to avoid.

I’m sorry, you can’t even read what you wrote?

At the very least, basic level, I don’t see any mention of them being in that region and IDK how they report without that.

Source is linked in the article within the first few sentences from people who are yes, actually in that region. You also indicated you trust “big” sources, who…also aggregate content from sources like this one that are actually in the region.

You skipped doing a simple internet search on any of that, which would have told you this, so I don’t have to.

They refer to even less known sources, them quoting anonymous individuals

It requires a very determined level of aggressive ignorance to both blow right past why anonymity might be quite necessary here, and to at the same time completely ignore that not all of the sources are anonymous.

I understand that this will not make you happy, and it probably won’t convince you, either. Neither of those factors makes these types of things less stupid to say.

You said stupid shit and then doubled-down on it when the answers were easily available. I don’t know why being called out on it is so surprising to you ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Sure, I can do that for you too. Is clicking the link easy enough?

Of course the interviewees are mostly anonymous. Does the context of the situation just entirely blow past you? You think it’d be super easy to do this and face no repercussions?

Also, did you just not read the quotes from the one non-anonymous source, or was that too far down in the article and your scrolling finger got tired? I’d rather assume you’re lazy than that you’re pushing an agenda, but hey it seems like we can all just make assumptions and do no digging to see if they’re true, so fuck it, you’re a war criminal that kicks puppies.

How dare you bring your puppy-kicking into this conversation. I demand a peer-reviewed paper proving you’re not a puppy-kicker and the authors must be owned by one of three major corporations or I won’t believe it. What’s that? You don’t even have a referenced Wikipedia page with sources that demonstrate you don’t kick puppies? Well fuck man, even that paper can’t help you now.

If you’d read the article, you’d see where they source the information from. This org often republishes and aggregates content from other sources that further its progressive aims.

All of this is readily available information at the end of a five second search. Just because you don’t read media that isn’t part of a for-profit corporation doesn’t mean they’re less reputable.

So because you’re unfamiliar with this organization (that has existed for almost 30 years), you called them “questionable” instead and merely implied that the report was fraudulent and that we should all do better than to post articles from sources you haven’t heard of and can’t be arsed to look into.

Then, when someone gave you evidence, you dismissed it because it didn’t agree with how you see the world. Don’t get me wrong, I think the bias fact check site is bullshit about half the time, but you still made an accusation, if obliquely, and provided no evidence.

What’s that thing we can do when people make assertions without evidence again? Oh right, dismiss those assertions without evidence.

Ah okay I would likely have missed those days since until this year I kept hoping windows wouldn’t completely shit the bed for my gaming PC.

I’ll have to take a look sway; think I’m still figuring out what I like best and GNOME felt familiar to the MacBook I like using for productivity (although now that I think about it, even Apple has a system-tray-like thing on the top of the screen). KDE was also fine but if I have a choice I usually like picking something with a spotlight-search equivalent; GNOME’s just looks more like spotlight so it activates the dumb part of my brain that likes familiarity.

Thanks for sticking with me through this conversation. Sometimes it’s hard to convey over text that I’m more ignorant than asshole on most Linux things.

Swear I’m neither of those things, but you’re talking about the system tray as in that little bucket of icons that sits in the lower-right of a taskbar usually?

This seems like it’d fall pretty neatly in the “you use it, so you think it’s required basic functionally; other people don’t, so they don’t care about it” realm. I do not miss the bucket. It doesn’t seem like awesome functionality (to me) to have to access application features through a bucket of tiny icons instead of the application itself and to be unable to access those features in the application.

I can see how frustrating it’d be if there’s something you like to use or have to use that only works if it can be in a system tray, but it’s not a ubiquitous feature requirement across all applications, so maybe GNOME is for people that don’t care for apps that require this and all the other mainstream OS options are for folks that do? Man that’s an annoying sentence to read; no wonder people get so angry about what seems like pointless minutiae.

I assume I dislike it because my work machine (windows, no choice there) always has about 30 things in its pointless icon bucket that can’t be closed by a basic user and do nothing beyond cluttering the taskbar and getting in the way. I get nothing out of a bucket of icons that exist only to silently scream “I’m running in the background still! Just in case anyone cares!” Not having to see that crap on my personal machine is a relief rather than a frustration for me.

Fair enough. I don’t know what those are, so I guess I can’t miss them.

That was pretty effing funny.

How much do you use your OS, though? I’d characterize it more as it works best by staying out of the way.

I turn the computer on, load a game or an occasional productive application, and I don’t think about it any more than that. My only real interaction with it beyond picking some initial settings is super+search for the thing I actually want to interact with.

Not that guy but phrases like “basic functionality” are just hard to pin down. What you need for your workflow and can’t live without is probably irrelevant fluff to a whole other class of folks.

I haven’t run into anything I need a third-party extension for yet, so I guess it works for some of us, although admittedly I do very few things on that machine so I could easily be missing something vital for most people.

You’d be correct on that Airdrop assumption. I get most of Lemmy reflexively hates Apple, but Airdrop between two Apple devices you own is about as braindead simple as it’s possible to be.

Maybe it’s just the hardware I’ve tried to use it on but it always seemed to take too long for me in 10, too (haven’t used 11). Whether trackpad gesture or win+tab, it’s just always seemed sluggish compared to other options.

Eh, the default organization they put on the App Library doesn’t offend me. I did add a widget for Reminders and another for Music though.

I hadn’t considered the connection, but now that you mention it I use Spotlight pretty much exclusively on my Mac too. Hopefully they don’t mess that feature up in the future or I’m going to have to learn how to manually organize things.

Thank you, I thought I was nuts for a minute.

…I thought we all just stopped having apps the Home Screen when we could put them in the library and unclutter everything.

If I’m shaking my own hand on this, do I wash them twice?

I’m not sure you’re in the right thread here, unless ios and android are political identities now.

It’s a phone, man. Not an F-350 rolling coal with a Trump flag.