UnbornTao

I see your point.

Nail, feet, Tarantino.

To be honest, now I'm not sure.

That's fair. You initially said you would have chosen Linux if it weren't for those reasons though, if I recall correctly. Analogy by GPT: Oh, memberships are generally conformity, by definition.

@Salvijus Watch the fart language video above.

Manousos

I see, must be the browser I'm using then.

Right?

Also, I'm not exactly sure that its being universal (in the sense of being broadly applied, perhaps) has to be incompatible with its being invented. But in my experience, I keep bumping into assumptions about language. Like: it is objective, it is just an add-on, it is absolute, etc.

I disagree with your point about communication somehow existing on its own. How would that even come about? Is language really limited to defining and labeling reality - as if reality were there as an immutable object, and language merely added commentary on top of it? Or is the relationship far more intertwined? Communication isn't a fact of the universe, but an activity. Bring to mind how much projection and conceptualization is involved in such an assumption. Language actively contributes to our experience in a creative way. It makes possible entire worlds for us to inhabit: science, philosophy, art, religion, belief, communication, comedy, metaphor, symbolism, talking with yourself. These are huge aspects of our shared experience of reality, and yet, without language, they couldn't exist. Think about it. The fact that a sound can represent something beyond or different from itself already points to language being invented. I get that written exchanges may not be especially effective, but at the very least they can leave us with a question or an opening to delve deeper into the topic, rather than simply assuming that all this means we actually comprehend what language is.

@Yimpa Haha, cool.

This is fair, as far as the ideology goes. It's not so much about refusing to use it, but about deliberately choosing an OS. Do people do that? For a large percentage of the user base that doesn't need specialized software like the Adobe suite, Linux or Mac can be better options. There's a case to be made that those are also conformist, of course.

Why that distro? How does it differ from the others?

How many deliberately choose to use it, even though alternatives - sometimes better ones - exist for the average user, especially when the use case involves only basic tasks? What percentage of the user base could do without it, yet install it either way?