We agree, it is ugly. Most Linux logos are made by programmers, not graphic designers and it shows. My point still stands that Debian's logo stands out as being particularly ugly. I don't care about the tribal fanboys who predictably took it as a personal attack and piled on the downvotes. Every time I used Debian the first thing I did is get rid of that eyesore everywhere I could.
Also while we're on the subject can we talk about the K shaped antlers on the KDE mascots? They just never looked like they belong there.
And attacking Cuba like this is justified because... What again? The missile crisis from 64 years ago?
Trump can't claim that it's because it is a dictatorship. He has been sucking Putin's dick in front of the whole world to see and is clearly aspiring to become one himself.
If there was a tier list of Linux Distro logos based purely on logo design quality, Debian would be on bottom tier. It is just an ugly logo. The top would probably be OpenSUSE.
Edit: Suck it, fragile fanboys. The logo IS ugly. The fact that we can't even point it out without having the downvotes piling on is the reason why Debian still has that eyesore for a logo.
All they had to do is put resources in making a more affordable model than the model 3. Instead they worked on the Cybertruck, stupid gimmicks like the car making fart noises and the "party mode" and had Musk do his best to become one of the most unlikable persons on the planet.
I can't for the love of me do a construction/renovation project with someone else. It gives me an intense headache an hour in. I can work on something on my own just fine though.
American oil corporations have been financing those separatist groups and their astroturfing campaigns in Alberta for a while now. I wish the Canadian government called it for what it is. They are trying to make Alberta Canada's Crimea.
I'm getting strong vibes of AI companies buying up 70% of next year's world RAM production for their future data centers that might never exist.
Have they even figured out a use for these robots that would justify theit cost yet, other than as fancy remote controlled puppets that simulate an independently functioning robot to manipulate investors?
I'm calling it. It's going to be another Cybertruck fiasco. There will be a handful of early adopters who will buy them with a huge markup and then the reality that the product absolutely fails to deliver on most of its promises will slowly spread, leaving them with a huge unsold inventory.
I don't get it. Google is just as bad, if not worse than Microslop when it comes to stripping their users of their privacy and control over their own devices. Why would that be an even remotely acceptable alternative to Windows?
Comes back with the same assertion as before except with added verbal frills, thinking it could pass as substance.