Working underpaid menial physical tasks for an unfeeling entity that seeks maximum profit for itself, doesn't care in any way, shape or form about the well-being of people or their safety and often makes unbelievably stupid mistakes without ever facing consequences or even learning from them?
We're doing that already. It's called working for a corporation.
The best example I can think of to represent what the article is taking about is Doritos. I like to think of myself as someone with a decent amount of self-control. But if I ever see a bag of Doritos I can crush a whole value pack in two sittings. That stuff is engineered to be as addictive as possible and it shows. The only reason why I'm not a walking blimp is that I dont buy any because I know what happens when that stuff is in my house.
If only they engineered something that was both addictive and healthy for a change. But I guess there isn't much incentive to sacrifice maximum addictiveness for health.
That point was never made I had to make it myself to conclude this stupid disagreement with something that made sense. Even after I did so, essentially agreeing to disagree he kept going, making it obvious he wasn't even taking this seriously. The guy was just out trolling while accusing me of not wanting to have a "discourse".
Seriously, you post one opinion that isn't necessarily popular but that you believe in, someone hijacks it with an immediate downvote and some comment to twist it around to make you the "bad guy" and people just pile on the bandwagon because snarkiness seems to beat arguments in places like that. People can't be bothered to read more than 2 lines. I thought that shit only happened on Reddit.
I've had aliens visit me to tell me they've used their unfathomably advanced technology to prove beyond any doubt that I was right and that your sources were wrong. But you'll also have to trust me on this. Quid pro quo.
Either that or I just find that logo ugly. Pick whichever.
You're ignoring the rest of the logo that puts it all together. Ultimately I think what makes the Debian logo particularly ugly is the "painted with a scraggly brush" effect.
Since you haven't given me a point to counter, there ain't much else to do. I'll try another approach.
Let's see your original point, if you can call it:
"...strong wrong opinions..."
So you appear to say that I'm wrong to say that the Debian logo is ugly. From that we can conclude that you find it pretty. I mean, it's fine. You could have simply argued that beauty lies in the eye of the beholder and that it looks good to you. I would have respected that. Here, I've created an adequate retort for you. You're welcome.
And since neither of us will ever be bothered to do an unbiased street survey on the beauty of a curled twig we will have to leave it at that.
Russia sure does like to do a lot of shit for a country whose entire economy relies on such highly flammable oil refineries.