I am not deep enough in it, but from the arch-announce mailinglist:

From the upstream report [1]:

openssh does not directly use liblzma. However debian and several other distributions patch openssh to support systemd notification, and libsystemd does depend on lzma.

Arch does not directly link openssh to liblzma, and thus this attack vector is not possible. You can confirm this by issuing the following command:

$(command -v sshd)

However, out of an abundance of caution, we advise users to remove the malicious code from their system by upgrading either way. This is because other yet-to-be discovered methods to exploit the backdoor could exist.

https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4

You think that after 99% of the US population decided to stop supporting climate change by not buying meat from billionaires, those 99% would still allow them to continue? Not for their own taste and convenience but for some billionaires profits?

They would sell $165 billion worth of meat, 22% of all meat products consumed in the US to a handful of billionaires and the US government? Ignoring the international business.

Billionaires would never touch that meat. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/10/zuckerberg-cattle-hawaii-beef-environment

Take a look at the Cargill family, 14 billionaires. From the wiki about the current CEO:

In 2019, former U.S. Congressman Henry A. Waxman, in a report by Mighty Earth, called Cargill “the worst company in the world” and noted that it drives “the most important problems facing our world” (deforestation, pollution, climate change, exploitation) “at a scale that dwarfs their closest competitors.”

Do you think that is because they use every cent to burn coal and oil in their backyard, or

do you think it is because they produce and sell products to consumers which can not be produced without harm to the environment?

99% of the planet could produce zero pollution for the rest of our lives and it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of pollution created by the billionaire class.

How do you think they would create that damage to the environment if nobody would buy their products?

Finally the phone for everyone who claims the fairphone is not sustainable anymore because they removed the headphone jack.

What firefox version? It could be that you are using xwayland depending on your or your distros settings. Maybe try setting

$ MOZ_ENABLE_WAYLAND=1 firefox

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Firefox#Wayland

According to the manpage --Yay --clean is the thought behind it, its a Yay specific shortcut for pacman -Rs $(pacman -Qqdt) Remove recursive what the Query quiet (short names) on the database lists as unrequired t

Now -Yc does not sound that bad.

It is still good to learn the verbose commands for pacman/paru/yay from the manpages, once you are familiar with them its easy to build more advanced commands for special use-cases.

multiple people warned them not to use arch.

My IT Bros said the same back when I had to choose W10 or Linux, they haven’t used arch and I had 0 Linux experience. I messed up every single step of the installation to a point where I knew from the problems I created what I did wrong. After many tries and a week later I had a working installation with dual boot. Never used windows and removed it a year later. It was rough but I learned how to recover from most errors a user can create.

If learning is the goal arch and arch-wiki is great.

SwayWM, but I think any of those you mentioned should be able to do it?

the wording was a bit of, it should spell “carcasses raised with their own shit”

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23817808/pig-farm-investigation-feedback-immunity-feces-intestines

A section of the A24 was limited to 130 kmph for 20 years to reduce accidents. Because the reduction the speed limit was lifted early this year. Now there are 8% more accidents with injury and 42% more injured. Politicians call now to make it possible to limit the section again.

https://archive.ph/hPIpp

We ded

Most likely outcome (high confidence)

still letting this here: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aba7357

Animal products. No, it was not worth it.

No, I am against the prohibition of common terms, I advocate for a stricter declaration of ingredients. “Milk” alone could be milk from any mammal, cow, goat, human. Steak could be a cut from any animal, that is why a the animal it is from is declared. Oat milk is called milk since centuries but now the industry fears competition and is publishing propaganda and pays lobbyism for restrictive laws.

Right, but ‘steak’ does mean a little more than that. It also would indicate a particular kind of cut of meat, which would generally indicate minimal connective tissue, tenderness, location, etc.

So as long as it has “steak” written on it you just care that is any animal with those properties?

Would you like ‘meat-free’ labels allowed on foods that had absolutely no muscle-tissue content, but did contain animal organ, bone, and fat content?

I want a strong indicator that a product contains any animal products. There are already many labels for plant based products but none are required by any law.

I am in strong favor a big prominent “contains animal products” label. It would make live so much easier.

Do you buy “steak” as in a generic description for something from any animal, or do you buy bison, camel, goat or horse steak? I have only seen plant based steaks or schnitzel where it has it in the name. “Plant based product” or “product based on soy/pea”

This sounds kinda wrong, if you would put that logic in other circumstances we are at the argument the “anti-women-voting-right” argument from the crazy lady: Women should only be allowed to vote if they work. Or old people who retire, should they not be allowed to vote anymore? People who have medical conditions and so on…

or somehow block the empathy from their brain applying to animals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance#Meat-eating

Its a multitude of reasons for people to go vegan: The animals, their own health, the probability of not creating a living hell on earth. The reason why vegans try to convince others is often because after a few years most are so disconnected from the killing of others for taste where it is a giant argument. The suffering and abuse of 90 billion sentient land animals per year alone is for most good enough to stop supporting it. I have surrendered that argument for most discussions because it is hard to have that empathy while it is a part in your live. It wasn’t for me, although is was not challenged in that view back then. So now my arguments moved more towards egoism which sometimes works.