x11 fork guy was saying some anti vax shit or something in the kernel discussions and I'm sure he's not the only lobotomy-right-wing commenter. Lob-right for short.
I’ve got a 2012 Mac book pro with arch Linux running great on it, other than some jiggery with the WiFi driver.
If it’s intel, it is totally a non issue that it’s a Mac, other than the ones from around 2012 need a couple of extra commands to get WiFi connected in the instillation image boot , and an extra package needs to be specified for instal to make sure it will be able to connect afterwards. Ethernet works without any jiggery or pokery.
Can confirm, arch runs fine on my 2014 macbook pro too. Does definitely require some adjusting to get there, but if you wanna use arch that's a given anyway. Gnome desktop has decent multi touch support for the trackpad out of the box IIRC.
i… gasp… sigh. you are correct. to be fair and show my age, my first linux box was slackware on a 486dx. had that bad boy in a plexi case serving up badass 90’s era perl scripts. 😂
Is it one of the more recent ones, i.e. one with a T2 chip? If so, T2 Linux might be for you. Got Arch running on a 2019 MacBook Pro this way. The WiFi kernel module causes quite a few issues, so it's a bit of a pain to install and even after that, WiFi will stop working occasionally, but reloading the kernel module helps if that happens. Definitely far from perfect, but still somewhat usable.
I think it's also possible and easier to install on older MacBooks without the T2 chip, but not sure since I have no experience with those.
Linux on older Intel Macs is genuinely a 10/10 experience in most cases I've run it on. The one hiccup that comes up is needing to add NOMODESET to* your grub entry.
In Indonesia, IIRC, being publicly an atheist is technically legal, but will get you killed, and nobody would convict your murderers. Atheists are seen there the way paedophiles are seen elsewhere.
I once had a coworker react to my atheism like that and I was so proud of myself for saying in my second language “what good does your religion bring when you would treat me like that for my beliefs while I treat you well?” It actually seemed to sink in, at least for all of our other (religious) coworkers who were, uh, forming a circle around us.
I used to work with this lady and at first we got along great. Then one day for reasons I cant fathom or remember the subject of the afterlife got brought up during a break period. She was talking to a couple of my coworkers about it. I didn't say anything because I had nothing to add the the conversation. Then she asked me directly so I told her I didn't believe in the afterlife.
She was stunned. She was all like "Where do you think you will go when you die?" I said I didn't think I would go anywhere, I would just cease to exist. She was like "You HAVE to believe you will go somewhere!" I asked "Why?" She had no answer for that but she stopped speaking to me entirely. Even when it was about something related to work.
Shortly after my boss assigned her to work with me. She would hardly acknowledge me when I spoke to her, and communication was kind of important to the job. I finally asked her what her problem was. In the most snarky tone she could muster she asked me what my problem was. I said my problem was that she was acting like a bitch.
Of course she ran and told the boss, and I had to go with a meeting with him and his two bosses. None of them respected the difference between me calling her a bitch, and saying that she was acting like a bitch. I got wrote up for it.
In countries that collect church taxes on behalf of the church, it can be necessary to officially de-register your religion to avoid paying taxes to the church.
A lot of churches/temples are membership-based. You can probably still attend sermons and the like in most cases if you're not a member, but they won't let you have a wedding, baptize your baby etc. in their temple.
That's wild to me. Or it isnt and the catholic roll is so normal to me that I don't see it as the same thing, just with participating locations in every part of the planet. Idk I haven't been Christian since college
It's wild to me that someone like Linus has the time and mental capacity to compose these. It's kind of nice to see that you can act like an unemployed Reddit mod no matter your other responsibilities. I too like to act that way occasionally.
When people are just the dumbest sometimes you need to unload. The weight of being a genuine person wanting to better this fucking disgrace of a world takes a toll.
In those moments, they're the personification of all the hate and ugly that your existence is against.
Indulging all the time yeah get the neckbeard and fedora ready... sometimes though
I figured "Is Morg that bad? Maybe Linus is overreacting, or there's missing context?" Ohhh boy. I can't even quote their posts without violating Lemmy's rules, but its openly white supremacist and crudely homophobic.
But it is kinda... morbidly fascinating to peer into that sort of community. I haven't heard some of those slurs since high school.
Oh, a user from poa.st. Figures. A year or two ago I spent a while looking at Fediverse block lists and that site was one of those that got frequently blocked/defederated. Because of all of the Nazis, apparently.
(Actually pretty weird that they even attempted to federate with Mastodon in the first place. Most of the Nazi shitholes just install Mastodon without federation, get blocked by the rest of the Fediverse just as a precaution, and then they run out of money and disappear quietly and the admins abscond with the donations and the users pretend nothing ever happened)
Also, this is apparently a bug in lemmy? It splits it out as two links (and the first is correct), but the "back" link is parsed as a user because of the @ symbol I guess.
Huh, none of that has anything to do with communism. I basically agree with everything except the guns part (I believe that to be a fundamentally incorrect interpretation of the wording of the 2nd amendment), but in a "the government has no business or right to regulate those things" libertarian way.
It's also not woke because the principle of bodily and personal autonomy is old school "don't tread on me" libertarianism, and thus "right wing". I think I agree with Linus about the inability to define those terms, carry on.
I may not be the target audience though as I also totally want socialized healthcare, free education extending into the collegiate level, and a UBI replacing all welfare programs, because those fall under the "General Welfare" set out by the Constitution and those things would cost less than what we have now for far better outcomes.
EDIT Wow, that's a lot of voting engagement. I am not sure if I pissed off the Left for saying I believe the 2nd amendment as written and intended grants an individual right to guns, the Right for saying universal healthcare and UBI is good and I don't believe the government can or should legislate abortion/LGBTQ rights/etc, or both sides equally.
I'm actually against that. Not against an UBI per se, but against it replacing all welfare programs.
The main issue here is that needs vary a lot, and depending on your specific needs, an UBI might not begin to cover them.
One of my kids has Cystic Fibrosis, which leads to frequent hospital stays. One of the main medications (Kaftrio, that stuff is a miracle drug, it's crazy how well it works) costs ~€350k per year.
UBI would be a drop in the ocean in this regard.
The same goes for a lot of other conditions. For example, a nursing home costs way more than any UBI would cover, but also if you have a disability that would require frequent assistance and/or a modified home or some special kind of transport, UBI would be just not enough.
But that's where socialized healthcare comes in. None of what you brought up would have to be covered by any sort of UBI. Especially since if we had a national UBI we would probably already have socialized healthcare since the latter would be easier to get through than the former.
That's the thing, though: many people advocating for UBL argue that it should replace ALL benefits (like the person I responded to) because, according to them, the UBL would cover all issues already. Generally speaking, people who argue like that are under 30 and haven't had any serious contact with chronic conditions and don't even consider the existence of anything worse than a broken leg.
Special needs (not only disabilities but all sorts of special circumstances) are complex, and UBL is a simple solution for complex issues. And a system like UBL needs to work for everyone, not only for most people.
I would like to point out that I did 100% say Universal Healthcare, and nowhere did I implay keeping our shitty healthcare system with a UBI. To further clarify, UBI should only replace welfare programs, so stuff like food stamps, WIC, TANIF, state welfare, social security, etc. because those have restrictions and fuck people over almost as many times as they help them.
Social Security probably won't be solvent in 50 years, food stamps are great until you make a dollar over the max allowable and lose all food assistance, WIC is great until your infant is just a little older and you lose all assistance. SSDI takes years to begin receiving and is, once again, subject to being dropped for any of a variety of reasons.
First guy was like "UBI should replace everything". Then I said "Watch out, everything is not a good idea because e.g. health care costs vary wildly". Second guy was like "Nobody is arguing for UBI without socialized healthcare". To which I said "Well, some people do". And then you came here and said "But second guy literally said he wants socialized healthcare".
Here, let me quote his last paragraph before the edit for you:
I may not be the target audience though as I also totally want socialized healthcare, free education extending into the collegiate level, and a UBI replacing all welfare programs, because those fall under the "General Welfare" set out by the Constitution and those things would cost less than what we have now for far better outcomes.
See that "I also totally want socialized healthcare" line?
I would think that having procedures, medications and other medical costs covered under universal healthcare and having a non-means tested or work gated UBI would be a hell of a lot better than the current Medicaid and SSI disability nightmares.
I include both of these together because currently the overhead expenditures for managing and running both the collective welfare programs at all levels and our for-profit healthcare system run at the behest of and for the profits of health insurance burn a significant amount of both money and time.
Needs may vary a lot, but having hoops to jump through to maintain eligibility for multiple welfare programs and under constant threat of being kicked off of any of them doesn't seem to be the right answer to me.
"the government has no business or right to regulate those things"
If you believe this, then you need also believe the government has no business regulating murder, rape, mass shootings, terrorism and domestic violence. Those two concepts cannot be extricated from one another. I get that right now in America is kind of the entire point of the 2nd amendment, but when you don't have a constitution that's fundamentally broken, this stuff doesn't happen so readily. Plus none of those 2nd amendment types are actually doing diddly squat to stop it.
I will assume that you mean only the 2nd amendment and not that preventing anti-transition and/or anti-abortion legislation would also prevent laws on murder, rape, etc. If I am wrong, I think my response will cover those as well.
The purpose of the government is to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. All those things you listed infringe on the rights and bodily autonomy of others, which falls under justice and general welfare at the very least. What anyone does with and to their own body under their own consent does not, and if thus overreach of the government.
Self defense, whether armed or unarmed, passive or active, is a natural right belonging to any living thing to prevent loss of their autonomy. Guns are tools to enable self defense and even the playing field. They can be and frequently are used without infringing on the rights and autonomy of others.
I also did not include guns under the government not having the right or business to regulate. I think they certainly can, and they have through the 2nd amendment. If you want to change this, you must follow the established and agreed upon rules to do so. If you do not, you weaken all other laws by establishing loopholes where they can be ignored.
The 2nd Amendment is a single sentence and the first four words, "a well regulated militia", are the subject. This is grammar. Unless you think the authors were bad at grammar, there's not much to misinterpret.
Yeah, but you have to take the whole sentence to actually identify the grammar, not just the first 4 words. Beyond what has already been said about well regulated meaning 'in good functional order', that is a explanatory preposition to why the rights of the people to keep and bear arms is important. The Federalist papers back this up well enough as well.
If I said "Because being hungry sucks, access to the fridge shall not be restricted", this does not imply that one must be hungry to have access to the fridge. Maybe it would be better if it were so people couldn't over eat or eat out of boredom, but you would need to change that sentence to make it mean you had to be hungry to access the fridge.
There is also the fact that under federal law, everyone not serving in the standing military or the national guard (the organized militia) is legally classified as the unorganized militia, but I don't think that even matters to the reading of the amendment.
Least angry Linus post
Anger is strongest when you care about the subject of the anger
Why would linus give a shit about right-wing swamp life?
x11 fork guy was saying some anti vax shit or something in the kernel discussions and I'm sure he's not the only lobotomy-right-wing commenter. Lob-right for short.
Makes me proud to push Linux professionally.
He went to therapy and got his shit fixed.
https://www.businessinsider.com/profile-linus-torvalds-inventor-linux-software-operating-system?op=1
Imagine being a reasonable human being and going to therapy
Pretty sure this exchange was after he calmed down.
Correct. I was responding to the inference that all Linus rants are angry.
In shocked and appalled that the guy who maintains the free os kernel might be a dirty commie. I use arch btw.
sob
I... I use arch.
i wanna use arch but my daily driver is a macbook pro with intel silicon.
I’ve got a 2012 Mac book pro with arch Linux running great on it, other than some jiggery with the WiFi driver.
If it’s intel, it is totally a non issue that it’s a Mac, other than the ones from around 2012 need a couple of extra commands to get WiFi connected in the instillation image boot , and an extra package needs to be specified for instal to make sure it will be able to connect afterwards. Ethernet works without any jiggery or pokery.
Can confirm, arch runs fine on my 2014 macbook pro too. Does definitely require some adjusting to get there, but if you wanna use arch that's a given anyway. Gnome desktop has decent multi touch support for the trackpad out of the box IIRC.
cool!
you get what you deserve
i… gasp… sigh. you are correct. to be fair and show my age, my first linux box was slackware on a 486dx. had that bad boy in a plexi case serving up badass 90’s era perl scripts. 😂
I got good news for you, come October 15th there will be a whole bunch of cheap liquidated ThinkPad laptops flooding Ebay, join us.
Really? Are they decent? Where are they coming from?
Windows 10 EOL, all of the computers with hardware "unsupported" by Windows 11 will be liquidated by businesses.
at our company, we threw out a Lenovo Yoga X390. Technically, W11 would be supported, but it's 6 years old now, so it goes in the trash.
I made sure it's "disposed of" properly. In totally unrelated news, I installed manjaro on my new Lenovo Yoga X390, which I found in the trash.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
asahi! fedora is fiiiine
That would be for Apple silicon, not intel.
ah.. i read "silicon" and nothing else
Is it one of the more recent ones, i.e. one with a T2 chip? If so, T2 Linux might be for you. Got Arch running on a 2019 MacBook Pro this way. The WiFi kernel module causes quite a few issues, so it's a bit of a pain to install and even after that, WiFi will stop working occasionally, but reloading the kernel module helps if that happens. Definitely far from perfect, but still somewhat usable.
I think it's also possible and easier to install on older MacBooks without the T2 chip, but not sure since I have no experience with those.
Linux on older Intel Macs is genuinely a 10/10 experience in most cases I've run it on. The one hiccup that comes up is needing to add
NOMODESETto* your grub entry.Intel . . . silicon?
Wait, you can get an atheist ID card?
In some countries, your religion is on your national id. See, for example, Indonesia or Thailand. Greece had it until 2005.
In some of these cases, you could literally have government id that says "Atheist".
But it is largely a figure of speech. It means you not only identify with a group, but publicly identify with a ground.
In Indonesia, IIRC, being publicly an atheist is technically legal, but will get you killed, and nobody would convict your murderers. Atheists are seen there the way paedophiles are seen elsewhere.
I once had a coworker react to my atheism like that and I was so proud of myself for saying in my second language “what good does your religion bring when you would treat me like that for my beliefs while I treat you well?” It actually seemed to sink in, at least for all of our other (religious) coworkers who were, uh, forming a circle around us.
I used to work with this lady and at first we got along great. Then one day for reasons I cant fathom or remember the subject of the afterlife got brought up during a break period. She was talking to a couple of my coworkers about it. I didn't say anything because I had nothing to add the the conversation. Then she asked me directly so I told her I didn't believe in the afterlife.
She was stunned. She was all like "Where do you think you will go when you die?" I said I didn't think I would go anywhere, I would just cease to exist. She was like "You HAVE to believe you will go somewhere!" I asked "Why?" She had no answer for that but she stopped speaking to me entirely. Even when it was about something related to work.
Shortly after my boss assigned her to work with me. She would hardly acknowledge me when I spoke to her, and communication was kind of important to the job. I finally asked her what her problem was. In the most snarky tone she could muster she asked me what my problem was. I said my problem was that she was acting like a bitch.
Of course she ran and told the boss, and I had to go with a meeting with him and his two bosses. None of them respected the difference between me calling her a bitch, and saying that she was acting like a bitch. I got wrote up for it.
Jesus fuck
I know that the Satanic Temple has membership cards you can buy. I'm sure there's probably other organizations out there that do as well.
I don't ever see it being helpful in life to register your religion.
It's mostly in death so people put you in the right cemetery.
I would worry more about being rounded up depending on your id and who's in charge than being put in the right place.
Right? Idgaf what happens to my corpse when I die, I won't be able to. They can throw it in the dumpster for all I care.
In countries that collect church taxes on behalf of the church, it can be necessary to officially de-register your religion to avoid paying taxes to the church.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/09/22/in-some-european-countries-church-membership-means-paying-more-taxes/
A lot of churches/temples are membership-based. You can probably still attend sermons and the like in most cases if you're not a member, but they won't let you have a wedding, baptize your baby etc. in their temple.
That's wild to me. Or it isnt and the catholic roll is so normal to me that I don't see it as the same thing, just with participating locations in every part of the planet. Idk I haven't been Christian since college
American Atheists is an organization that will happily take dues and send you a membership card in return.
This is one of the most heartwarming things I’ve read in weeks. Linus is a treasure.
It's wild to me that someone like Linus has the time and mental capacity to compose these. It's kind of nice to see that you can act like an unemployed Reddit mod no matter your other responsibilities. I too like to act that way occasionally.
When people are just the dumbest sometimes you need to unload. The weight of being a genuine person wanting to better this fucking disgrace of a world takes a toll.
In those moments, they're the personification of all the hate and ugly that your existence is against.
Indulging all the time yeah get the neckbeard and fedora ready... sometimes though
he is a being made mostly of rage.
also finnish.
Finish? I thought the Linux project is forever ongoing! (/s)
Ongoing? 'Ardly know 'er.
For what it's worth, I think this exchange is at least a couple years old. It's not the first time I've seen this diatribe.
Edit: somebody else posted the link. 2 years ago: https://social.kernel.org/notice/AWSXomDbvdxKgOxVAm
Linus is the best kind of jerk.
"i don't use woke communist propaganda!"
sent from linux"
That's my benevolent dictator for life alright
I've never liked him more.
When was this posted? Or is it not at https://social.kernel.org/torvalds ?
I was able to dig it up:
https://social.kernel.org/notice/AWSXomDbvdxKgOxVAm
Thanks.
I found morgthorak (as their post was deleted).
(Offensive Language Warning) https://mk.gabe.rocks/@[email protected]
I figured "Is Morg that bad? Maybe Linus is overreacting, or there's missing context?" Ohhh boy. I can't even quote their posts without violating Lemmy's rules, but its openly white supremacist and crudely homophobic.
But it is kinda... morbidly fascinating to peer into that sort of community. I haven't heard some of those slurs since high school.
Oh, a user from poa.st. Figures. A year or two ago I spent a while looking at Fediverse block lists and that site was one of those that got frequently blocked/defederated. Because of all of the Nazis, apparently.
(Actually pretty weird that they even attempted to federate with Mastodon in the first place. Most of the Nazi shitholes just install Mastodon without federation, get blocked by the rest of the Fediverse just as a precaution, and then they run out of money and disappear quietly and the admins abscond with the donations and the users pretend nothing ever happened)
Well, that isn't much worse than most right-wingers. What I call concentration camp fetish (and pedants fuck me over for it) is very popular.
I'm getting "Page not found" with those links
There you go!
Thanks!
Hit the 'notes' tab.
Also, this is apparently a bug in lemmy? It splits it out as two links (and the first is correct), but the "back" link is parsed as a user because of the @ symbol I guess.
Thanks
Thank you. Good find.
Hmm.. I can see the thread in mastodon, except for that specific comment. Everything is visible if I visit social.kernel.org in Firefox though.
A few years ago.
Linus coming out swinging, ya love to see it
He's not gonna sugarcoat it, ever. Hell yeah.
Holy based
o7
What paltform is he on?
That's mastodon
Akkoma actually, but same basic thing.
Ha, I never knew he was there. Pity he is no longer active.
I remember when this was forat curculating I found him and his post on mastodon.
His own blogs no?
Very well put.
*Acided. See how stupid you sound?
what
Edit: ah, acid is the opposite of a base. He's very acided :3
Huh, none of that has anything to do with communism. I basically agree with everything except the guns part (I believe that to be a fundamentally incorrect interpretation of the wording of the 2nd amendment), but in a "the government has no business or right to regulate those things" libertarian way.
It's also not woke because the principle of bodily and personal autonomy is old school "don't tread on me" libertarianism, and thus "right wing". I think I agree with Linus about the inability to define those terms, carry on.
I may not be the target audience though as I also totally want socialized healthcare, free education extending into the collegiate level, and a UBI replacing all welfare programs, because those fall under the "General Welfare" set out by the Constitution and those things would cost less than what we have now for far better outcomes.
EDIT Wow, that's a lot of voting engagement. I am not sure if I pissed off the Left for saying I believe the 2nd amendment as written and intended grants an individual right to guns, the Right for saying universal healthcare and UBI is good and I don't believe the government can or should legislate abortion/LGBTQ rights/etc, or both sides equally.
"Communism" and "woke" are the same in this context, because both are pejoratives right wingers use for "everything I don't like".
I'm actually against that. Not against an UBI per se, but against it replacing all welfare programs.
The main issue here is that needs vary a lot, and depending on your specific needs, an UBI might not begin to cover them.
One of my kids has Cystic Fibrosis, which leads to frequent hospital stays. One of the main medications (Kaftrio, that stuff is a miracle drug, it's crazy how well it works) costs ~€350k per year.
UBI would be a drop in the ocean in this regard.
The same goes for a lot of other conditions. For example, a nursing home costs way more than any UBI would cover, but also if you have a disability that would require frequent assistance and/or a modified home or some special kind of transport, UBI would be just not enough.
But that's where socialized healthcare comes in. None of what you brought up would have to be covered by any sort of UBI. Especially since if we had a national UBI we would probably already have socialized healthcare since the latter would be easier to get through than the former.
That's the thing, though: many people advocating for UBL argue that it should replace ALL benefits (like the person I responded to) because, according to them, the UBL would cover all issues already. Generally speaking, people who argue like that are under 30 and haven't had any serious contact with chronic conditions and don't even consider the existence of anything worse than a broken leg.
Special needs (not only disabilities but all sorts of special circumstances) are complex, and UBL is a simple solution for complex issues. And a system like UBL needs to work for everyone, not only for most people.
I would like to point out that I did 100% say Universal Healthcare, and nowhere did I implay keeping our shitty healthcare system with a UBI. To further clarify, UBI should only replace welfare programs, so stuff like food stamps, WIC, TANIF, state welfare, social security, etc. because those have restrictions and fuck people over almost as many times as they help them.
Social Security probably won't be solvent in 50 years, food stamps are great until you make a dollar over the max allowable and lose all food assistance, WIC is great until your infant is just a little older and you lose all assistance. SSDI takes years to begin receiving and is, once again, subject to being dropped for any of a variety of reasons.
He literally said "I totally want socialized healthcare".
Follow the thread, read the context.
First guy was like "UBI should replace everything". Then I said "Watch out, everything is not a good idea because e.g. health care costs vary wildly". Second guy was like "Nobody is arguing for UBI without socialized healthcare". To which I said "Well, some people do". And then you came here and said "But second guy literally said he wants socialized healthcare".
Here, let me quote his last paragraph before the edit for you:
See that "I also totally want socialized healthcare" line?
Wasn't there in the original version.
I would think that having procedures, medications and other medical costs covered under universal healthcare and having a non-means tested or work gated UBI would be a hell of a lot better than the current Medicaid and SSI disability nightmares.
I include both of these together because currently the overhead expenditures for managing and running both the collective welfare programs at all levels and our for-profit healthcare system run at the behest of and for the profits of health insurance burn a significant amount of both money and time.
Needs may vary a lot, but having hoops to jump through to maintain eligibility for multiple welfare programs and under constant threat of being kicked off of any of them doesn't seem to be the right answer to me.
If you believe this, then you need also believe the government has no business regulating murder, rape, mass shootings, terrorism and domestic violence. Those two concepts cannot be extricated from one another. I get that right now in America is kind of the entire point of the 2nd amendment, but when you don't have a constitution that's fundamentally broken, this stuff doesn't happen so readily. Plus none of those 2nd amendment types are actually doing diddly squat to stop it.
I will assume that you mean only the 2nd amendment and not that preventing anti-transition and/or anti-abortion legislation would also prevent laws on murder, rape, etc. If I am wrong, I think my response will cover those as well.
The purpose of the government is to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. All those things you listed infringe on the rights and bodily autonomy of others, which falls under justice and general welfare at the very least. What anyone does with and to their own body under their own consent does not, and if thus overreach of the government.
Self defense, whether armed or unarmed, passive or active, is a natural right belonging to any living thing to prevent loss of their autonomy. Guns are tools to enable self defense and even the playing field. They can be and frequently are used without infringing on the rights and autonomy of others.
I also did not include guns under the government not having the right or business to regulate. I think they certainly can, and they have through the 2nd amendment. If you want to change this, you must follow the established and agreed upon rules to do so. If you do not, you weaken all other laws by establishing loopholes where they can be ignored.
The 2nd Amendment is a single sentence and the first four words, "a well regulated militia", are the subject. This is grammar. Unless you think the authors were bad at grammar, there's not much to misinterpret.
I think the authors lived during the mid to late 1700s when "well regulated" meant "well equipped"
Yeah, but you have to take the whole sentence to actually identify the grammar, not just the first 4 words. Beyond what has already been said about well regulated meaning 'in good functional order', that is a explanatory preposition to why the rights of the people to keep and bear arms is important. The Federalist papers back this up well enough as well.
If I said "Because being hungry sucks, access to the fridge shall not be restricted", this does not imply that one must be hungry to have access to the fridge. Maybe it would be better if it were so people couldn't over eat or eat out of boredom, but you would need to change that sentence to make it mean you had to be hungry to access the fridge.
There is also the fact that under federal law, everyone not serving in the standing military or the national guard (the organized militia) is legally classified as the unorganized militia, but I don't think that even matters to the reading of the amendment.
I disagree. Evolution would accelerate if everyone had a gun. Also, the kernel has grown out of control. OpenBSD for the win!
That’s not how evolution works.