Surely their perspective was vastly different than ours. This attempt was likely reasonable at its time in 1948, when Israel was hardly a state. Hindsight is always different from actual sight.
Israel is not a single entity but a collection of collections who do not agree with each other. Just like any country you will find everything there. The problem is always the militants (e.g. IDF, Hamas in this case) and the dominant minority of people yielding authority over violence. The rest of the people are just that: people. With different thoughts, aspirations, suffering and preconceptions. Just like all of us here. Therefore, there is no "One Israel" that wants us to believe something specific. Depends on who you talk to.
Nope. Not the way we understand communism today. Our understanding of communism in 2023 is very different from 1935-45. Most likely you and I would have been sympathetic to communism then, and Einstein would condemn communism in later years (e.g. today) if he was alive.
The author is exited but I'm not. I am not a big fan of corporations taking the free work of FOSS developers and turning it into a proprietary dystopia.
So cool!!!
Hilarious! Well done!
I'd like to see them try.
From DRM-equipped browsers to DRM-equipped brains. Now, that's progress...
You have a point here indeed. But it is much easier to create a CLI tool that combines the updates of all systems rather than destroying the incredible things that flatpak and pip offer. A five-line bach script would do. Although, a reliable distro would probably want to rely on something much more elegant and harder to break. For Fedora specifically, the python-based dnf tool should be straightforward to be extended to do that. Perhaps the Debian apt tool has a lot of functionality to carry on and may be harder to do. In the essence of unix philosophy and modular approach, it should be a separate tool. I'm looking forward to that too.
I know that a lot of people share the same thoughts with you but I respectfully disagree. If you want your system to be updated only with your apt/yum/dnf program, then just don't install anything useing snap/flatpak/etc. Sure, you will not have all the apps available in the repos, which was also the case in the past before these systems. Back then, your only option was to compile from source, which was more work-intensive than flatpaks/appimages/snaps. And updating was also much more complicated. Therefore, unless you wanted something really special, you'd stick to your repos. Flatpaks allow developers to distribute their software (and users to install it) in a less labour-intensive manner for the developer. Compiling and testing your app for Debian, Fedora, Arch, SuSE, MX-Linux, Linux Mint, Linux Mint DE, Gentoo, and all the other popular distros is an impossible task for small developers. Flatpaks was a godsend for them and for the users who don't want to compile from source. Now, you can argue that we shouldn't have all these systems (flatpak, snap, appimage, docker, etc...) but one would be OK. And again I will disagree. One of the most important aspects of FOSS is diversity. Embrace it even with its drawbacks. It would require a much longer post to explain this and others have done it already better than I would.
For someone as tech illiterate as my mom, I'd advise against trying it. But you are here and my mom would never know that Lemmy is a thing. You also ask about Linux.
I'd guess that you will have great fun using and appreciating what Linux and the foss communities have created.