This is a point release, what do you expect?

Log a bug if you want to see it fixed.

Your reply wasn’t removed.

I can only assume it is not showing, because the parent comment you replied to was removed for rule breaches.

That’s correct.

Although Mozilla is a partner working on the project, not just a passive integrator.

Just use uBlock Origin instead.

Always a classic

Do you have a link to the bug?

deleted by creator

I’m sorry, but your assertion that those who are upset with nvidia are mostly “newbs” is nonsense.

Plenty of more experienced users despise nvidia as well, and they have done immense damage to the Linux desktop.

In fact I would argue the opposite, given the proliferation of distros focused on new users which specialise in making nvidia drivers easily accessible for these users.

Fedora, Red Hat and Ubuntu are Wayland by default, as are Debian and openSUSE Tumbleweed/Leap Gnome.

Why on Earth are these nonsense blog rants constantly upvoted here?

It is essentially an unlettered rant that conflates the author’s UI and toolkit preferences with an objective view.

It doesn’t even provide a useful comparison to the evolution of QT to provide for a meaningful reference of its implied assertion that the evolution of GTK is too rapid for devs.

deleted by creator

Sorry not sure.

I’m sure it could be replicated with a theme and Extensions, but this might take some time.

I would definitely recommend installing it in a VM or liveUSB and trying it out. It won me over, when I thought it would just be another themed distro.

It really is quite useful for a certain user.

It has a really great selection of polished layouts OOTB that can make GNOME look very familiar to whatever the user is used to.

Also has some other great tweaks around WINE for beginners, and a more easily accessible Nvidia option in install media.

I don’t use it myself, but I would suggest it is ideal for someone who is a basic computer user who wants to mostly web browse and use home office tools. It really is ultra-polished.

Yes this could mostly be replicated with extensions and themes, but honestly, unless you have strong feelings about your OS, which most people don’t, it is not worth messing about with this (particularly when installing for others) when Zorin is available; it can be a headache to have to maintain such comprehensive layout changes through extensions and themes without breakage throughout upgrades. It also has the benefits of being based on the very actively developed GNOME, compared to something with a smaller team like Cinnamon, namely much better Wayland support, and in my view more polish.

It’s an Ubuntu-derivative using Gnome, but with a large number of tweaks to make it very user friendly out of the box. They have a variety of pre-made layouts in a beautiful theme that can pretty well replicate Windows 7, 10, 11 and Mac layouts among others, as well as a clear option to include Nvidia drivers OOTB in install media, and a better WINE experience for example.

It supports wayland just fine.

In my view it has all the benefits of Mint without many of the drawbacks stemming from its custom DE.

I personally don’t use it, preferring Gentoo or Fedora, but I think it is a very good choice for beginners or those people who only use a computer for web browsing and home office use.

Developer edition is essentially Firefox beta, with some tweaks that developers may prefer by default, and some experimental dev features.

As I understand it, it aligns with beta, but is an early beta, meaning that while it shares its codebase, it may get access to some feature rollouts (that are gated by edition) slightly earlier than true Firefox Beta.

It is opensource. The only thing that aren’t are some required Google Play libraries for notifications and the EME - Firefox can’t make those open as it doesn’t control them.

https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/firefox-android

Unless I am misunderstanding you, it is, on Dec 14.

Extensions just have to specify they are compatible.

To be honest a lot of this stuff is pretty easily answered and has been discussed ad nauseum in spaces like /r/vegan. This is also not a great space to ask this question of vegans, as a lot of carnists (yes that includes vegetarians) come here to argue against veganism and upvote answers they agree with but that practicing ethical vegans are likely to reject. You are likely to get better answers from vegans in other spaces.

In terms of your above post there is nothing scientific in what you’ve described. It appears you are using a veneer of science to avoid adopting views you disagree with. To be frank there is a lack of research on almost all animals in terms of their sentience, intelligence and capacity to suffer, presumably due to the carnist nature of society. There is also the unavoidable philosophical problem of other minds, which we are unlikely to be able to readily solve with science; we will never truly be able to determine the experience of another non-homo sapien creature and can only work through analogy to the experience of homo sapiens.

The above notwithstanding, even if some creatures are more “intelligent” in some ways than other creatures, how does this impact their entitlement to the bare minimum of moral consideration, i.e. freedom from intentional harm and exploitation? How have you determined that each “tier” that you have created only deserves the rights you have designated? The assignment and exclusion of moral consideration is the province of philosophy and politics, not science. There are certain classes of humans who are alive, and through severe disability or illness, have intelligence arguably lesser than many of the animals listed above in your lower tiers. Would you therefore exclude them from moral consideration? Of course not, and this is why intelligence is irrelevant to moral consideration - it is not a morally relevant characteristic.

The morally relevant characteristic that stands philosophical rigour to determine if moral consideration should be granted is a capacity to suffer. It is pretty clear that all of the animals listed, apart perhaps from tier 5, have this, so it makes sense for these animals to have moral consideration.

You have also completely ignored the well established link between commodification and carnism in the above, which is a key reason, as to why exploitation and commodification of animals is ethically unacceptable and should be eschewed - the commodification of animals, or relegation of them to zoe, is fundamentally how we as a society and as individuals justify their ongoing torture, mistreatment and slaughter in most ways throughout society. This is without even going into other issues regarding exploitation, such as an inability for an animal to provide meaningful consent, and respect for bodily autonomy that we grant other individuals, regardless of intelligence.

This doesn’t mean that vegans would generally be opposed to adopting animals to care for them, or opening sanctuaries - most people I have encountered and literature I have read understand that we operate within the internal logic of a carnist society, and that while it is unethical to engage in the support of further breeding, it is ethical to care for adopted animals (or animals you had prior to going vegan) that have already been brought into existence through this system.

In terms of your tier 5, due to the lack of research here, the problem of other minds, and the lack of necessity here for people to engage in the exploitation or harm of these creatures, I am of the view that the default position should be erring on the side of caution.