“I think we’re in an age when nuclear deterrent is actually less effective because the West is very unlikely to use anything like a nuclear bomb, whereas our adversaries might,” he added. “Where you have technological parity but moral disparity, the actual disparity is much greater than people think.”

What kind of reality does this guy live in? Like every adversary he mentions has either adopted a “No First Use” Policy or officially states that nuclear weapons are only to be used when the very existence of the state is threatened via a conventional military force or when being attacked by nuclear weapons. Contrast this to the US which “‘reserves the right to use’ nuclear weapons first in the case of conflict” or the UK which reserves the right to use nuclear weapons against “rogue states” (source: wikipedia article detailing all the above mentioned first use policies). How can you claim to have any moral superiority when your fucking bloc has these murderous policies in place? The western bloc has enshrined first use into its official policy and then this guy claims that only the adversaries of the West are determined to use nuclear weapons. The hypocrisy is beyond me.

Windows 95 -> 98 -> XP -> 7 -> 8 -> OSX -> Arch (1 month) -> Gentoo (1 year) -> VOID (3 years) -> NixOS (4 years) (transitioning to Guix System now)

For reference, this was my editor hopping journey which started during my OSX days since I learned to program during this time: Sublimetext -> vim -> neovim -> emacs

If you are looking for UI inspiration, you could give !unixporn@lemmy.ml or its counterpart at reddit r/unixporn a look. As a linux novice you might be interested in the KDE,XFCE or GNOME customizations that are shared in these communities.

Not sure if it’s atypical, but you could try reading “Alan Carr’s Easy Way to Stop Smoking” and “The Freedom Model of Addictions”. The basic premise of the books is, that if you really want to quit, you will quit easily, and that in order to really want to quit you need to reevaluate the reward value of your habit instead of focusing on the negatives. You smoke because you find it pleasurable. The books guide you to better understand what part of your habit you find pleasurable exactly. Is it the nicotine rush? Or maybe the you like the social aspect of it? After finding out what exactly you find pleasurable about your habit, the books will give you pointers on how to reevaluate if the pleasure you derive from it is really all that great compared to other activities or whether it really solves the problem that you set out to solve with your habit.

Nicht dass das diesmal nicht vielleicht anders ist, aber ich kann mich noch daran erinnern als Schulz vor 6 Jahren als Kanzlerkandidat für die SPD bekannt gegeben wurde. Da hatte die SPD in den Umfragen kurz über 30% statt vorher 20% [1]. Dann ist langsam durchgesickert, dass Schulz eine Kontinuität der alten Politk ist und die SPD ist wieder abgestürzt.