>"You are exclusively recommending Lenovo because your own knowledge of the industry is outdated."

No, I am basing it on long-term experiece not only with compatibility, but with build quality. I never said other brands were trash, just that I have had nothing but continuous good experience with Thinkpads (and note, just that line of models; not IdeaPads, not Yogas, not desktops, not servers). For desktops and servers, I tend to go with HP.

I am aware of the "subsidizing" stuff that goes on with some manufacturers. But even if MS-Windows were a "free" option, I would still want to opt out of it, if nothing else but to punish those involved in the process of locking in consumers with unfriendly, proprietary, insecure, privacy-invading stuff. And also to send a clear signal to the manufacturers that I want support for the OS of my choice.

>"I have a 12th gen. And the camera situation is still a mess"

Works fine on my recent Thinkpad X13 Gen 3 AMD. As does everything on it under Linux.

Same at work with recent Thinkpad E14 Gen 6 AMD laptops.

>"Lenovo May Be Avoiding the 'Windows Tax' By Offering Cheaper Laptops With Pre-Installed Linux"

Good. This is the way it *should* be, but with all computers and models of them. It is ridiculous that we allow Microsoft to strong-arm almost all [non-Apple] manufacturers to pay for MS-Windows and pass on that cost to consumers, some of whom don't want it. They do this by punishing companies that try to offer other (or no pre-installed) operating systems.

If more companies would simply give buyers the *choice* and also SHOW the price they pass on for including MS-Windows, perhaps there would be lots more Linux desktops/laptops.

One of the reasons I exclusively buy and recommend Lenovo Thinkpads is precisely because they work so well under Linux... the only OS I have on any of them. Unfortunately, I have yet to select a model that meets my needs and on which I had the option to omit the unwanted MS-Windows and the cost that goes with it. Offering a few, "select" models is nice, but it should be all of them.

And I don't care which distro they offer, because I will just wipe it and install what I want, anyway (which for quite a while now has been Mint).

>"while the tong still remains firmly attacked"

That should read "firmly attached"
I need to proof-read BEFORE clicking submit. Sigh.

>"I'd rather have a zipper that doesn't suck cloth in and stronger zipper pulls."

This. Plus...

I would rather have a zipper on which the tongue/tong doesn't separate from the clothing. Or there was some way of fixing it when that happens. Almost every zipper failure I have experienced has been from that and ruined expensive clothing (like outerwear, motorcycle gear, etc) because it would require replacing the entire zipper, which would cost more than the clothing.

Most of the time, it is the falling apart of the zipper ribbon material the tong is attached to, while the tong still remains firmly attacked. But there is nothing left there to mend because it fails right near the tong. The leading edge of the ribbon, where it must be fed into the pull, needs to be strengthened to prevent that from happening. And that seems to be my #1 failure point.

And yes, some (many?) of the failures were on YKK zippers.

>"or even just make it the center channel"
>"the other half they didn't bother putting the dialogue full-on in the center channel"

The dialog shouldn't always be on the center channel. It usually is, when the picture is looking directly at the actor speaking. But it is perfectly fine for dialog to come out of any direction (speaker), or multiple directions at once, depending on the shot. That isn't the problem.

If you have a proper surround system, with powerful, discrete, properly-positioned speakers and it is balanced and tuned correctly, the direction of the dialog (which speaker(s)) shouldn't make any difference in the clarity or volume of the dialog. The issue is that the content creators are intentionally under-voluming the dialog or allowing "kewl sound effects" to interfere/compete with the dialog too much. And that trend has gotten worse year after year.

>"The biggest problem is that sound on most TVs sucks. "

No. This is about the source material (and sometimes, but more rarely, the content delivery companies mucking around with transcoding).

Sound on all TVs has *ALWAYS* sucked, at least compared to actual home-theater setups. That is why who really care about audio (like me) have a "real" audio system, with 6+ quality speakers properly placed in the room and using a powerful, expensive Dolby amplifier and with the system properly calibrated by putting a microphone in the sweet spot and performing a self-test/adjustment.

The problem with dialog-drowning is real. It is in the content. It is intentional. It is not about the end-user's audio equipment. Rarely used to be an issue and has gotten worse and worse.

>"silly to have an 80" 8K screen with crappy speakers mashed against the wall it's mounted to."

Yes, it is. And even a "sound bar" isn't going to give a great experience. Not compared to "large", quality speakers set around the room and tuned to the room. But when the content is whacked, nothing works properly. And then you are faced with having to muck around with stuff, like boosting the center channel, or using "enhancers"/"filters", which throw everything else off.

I have excellent hearing and an excellent, real, expensive 5.1 system that is perfectly balanced (objectively with mics and self-testing of the audio equipment). I sit in the tuned sweet spot.

The problem with muddy and under-volumed dialog is absolutely real, and I experience it regularly on many "modern" films and shows. It was rarely an issue 15+ years ago, and slowly has gotten worse.

So no, it isn't my hearing or setup. Most of the time it is some strange decision by the producers of the content. Some of the time it seems to be some type of audio processing done by the content delivery company.

>"Errr no. Precisely none of India's 2 stroke 150-300cc scooters get 100MPG. They are closer to 10-20MPG."

My 14-year-old, large, extremely fast, 1400cc 4cyl/4stroke motorcycle gets up to 48MPG. And that is with a 2-way cat. How can any tiny/light bike, even 2-stroke, get only 10-20MPG?

>"as well as ban sales of fuel-guzzling motorbikes and scooters"

Motorbikes and scooters are NOT "fuel-guzzling". They are very lightweight and efficient. Many average around 100MPG, some as high as 144MPG. I think all of them have been 4-cycle engines, as well (meaning far less pollution).

Putting these in the same topic as cars/SUV's/trucks/buses is ridiculous.

It doesn't have a "bunch" it has "some". And you can turn if off with a few clicks on one screen. It is clearly labeled, and the setting is retained "forever". And, unlike Chrome, is completely open-source, so anyone can examine exactly what it is doing.

You do not need to use "custom userscripts" for full control over Firefox settings.

>" The precise causes remain unknown"

And yet so many of the key narratives worked in!

* Immigrants
* DOGE
* Climate Change
* Tariffs

I am sure it could adversely affect "marginalized populations", LGBATQ+, and elevate systemic racism, too. Commence with the downmoding of this post- maybe, ironically, as "off-topic".

Oh- "loss of habitat"? The article is about commercial, non-native, "man made" bee colonies that are used to pollinate crops. That is their habitat.

>"I assumed you already looked into it [ACME]"

I haven't, but will. I have no idea if that can help in this odd situation in which I am stuck.

To me, this radical shortening of certificate duration really does look like a bunch of "security theater" and full of potential conflicts of interest. My posting was to point out that, despite what appears to be the majority opinion, there are minority cases (of which I am one) where it will cause a lot of damage.

It is easy for people to dismiss such cases as "you are doing it wrong" (you are not doing that), without any sensitivity about not everyone has CONTROL of all the systems and mess they have to manage and yet have to deal with the real-world consequences of it.

If something like ACME doesn't pan out, I will probably have to use a different domain, one that is NOT a subdomain of mine, but is in control by that vendor and make it their problem. ( Example: my_domain.system_name instead of system_name.my_domain). Of course, that requires a ton of change and expense and hassle as well. And probably many "gotchas" I haven't considered yet.

>"No, it would stop being Chinese if other people generated a model without the same pro-CCP orientation baked in. It might resemble open source in some way if doing that was practical"

That is a very good point. There is the project to use the model, and the model, itself. Although the project to use the model can be completely open, how is that even possible with a model- unless everything that was used to create the model were also open? And even if it were, which "normies" would have the resources to build it again from scratch? And even if they did have such resources, without examining everything that was fed into the model in detail, how do you know which biases it might still have?