Are you serious right now? I don't mean this in an insulting way at all, but I can see why you're dealing with loneliness. Take some time to self reflect and figure out why you lashed out here(seriously, really think about it or show some friends this dialogue without context and ask what they think, in person). Like the commenter, I hope you find you find your community, but you are far from the path. Your attitude is fixable, nobody is playing down the problems here and instead people who were in your shoes empathetically showed you a way out, but you need some serious self reflection.
In case it's not clear, original replier's comment here is absolutely correct and it doesn't necessarily have to be in a religious pretext (re: the church article), that's just a palpable example for most people. Neighbors, community centers, hobbies, etc-- these all require work on everybody's end and you must commit to these relationships to create a semblance of something to revolve your life around in lieu of drowning in loneliness.
For sure, my church citation wasn't about religion specifically, but that the decline in third spaces in general and a lack of community can be directly connected to early deaths and deaths of despair.
Church does not have to be a church of faith, it can well be a church of reason.
What matters is that people with shared values get to spend time together on a regular basis without getting into status games that might eventually show up no matter what the church.
I've tried a few types of churches of reason and they are pretty sad, honestly. Hard core, dedicated, non-religious person here, so I'm not saying that people should go to Church, but I've never seen anything approximating a Church of Reason that would have satisfied my (admittedly minimal) social desires.
I hear you. For me things that have worked are those that are built around a hobby -- travelling to the wooded hills, astronomy, music recitals, caring for strays / abandoned pets.
I wrote that comment back when he had only one or two links, and this post had 4 comments anod 2 points. I stand by what I said: I wish I could have downvoted it for being a low effort drive by comment.
To be blunt: what you said was completely out of line. You were mad that he wasn't responding to your other comment (why wasn't it in the OP if you wanted people to read that stuff before responding?). You then got mad that his comment was voted higher than yours (again, putting all that in the OP would've fixed that, not to mention complaining about vote counts is straight up childish).
Just take the L man. You lashed out for no good reason, the person you responded had a hell of a lot more grace and tact than you showed this entire exchange, just learn from it and move on.
Agree to disagree. And as soon as I get to 500, I'm going to downvote his comment on principle alone, even if it happens next week. I'm not mad, and it's not about anything other than acting on what I believe to be right.
Hi all, just read the attached URL and while I was initially excited to go through this book, I was disappointed to see that it did not cover these fundamental (albeit newer) features like cgroups, namespaces, and io_uring.
Does anybody have recommendations for books or an online interactive resource that includes such newer concepts? Or should I just slog through this linked tome and supplement this part somewhere else?
not really an answer ofcourse, but what ive found to be quite fun is having the elixir linux source code open in Edge, and using the copilot side-window to just copy-paste it bits of code and asking it to walk me through it (select block of code, right click, "ask copilot".)
sort of like a modern-day "a commentary on the unix operating system". LLMs appear to be (probably unsurprisingly) very knowledgeable about Linux internals.
reply