Ka’ila Farrell-Smith grew up in a community that was deeply involved in the fight for Indigenous rights, protesting broken treaties and other mistreatment of Native American people. Members of the movement, she said, understood that law enforcement agencies were surveilling their activities.

“I’ve been warned my entire life, ‘The FBI’s watching us,’” said Farrell-Smith, a member of the Klamath Tribes in Oregon.

Government records later confirmed wide-ranging FBI surveillance of the movement in the 1970s, and now the agency is focused on her and a new generation of Indigenous activists challenging development of a mine in northern Nevada. Farrell-Smith advises the group People of Red Mountain, which opposes a Canadian company’s efforts to tap what it says is one of the world’s largest lithium deposits.

“They treat us like we’re domestic terrorists,” added Chanda Callao, an organizer with People of Red Mountain.

Full Article (archive)

tldr:
For Linux adoption it would be better for devs to focus on 2 ("main") distros which are very similar to Windows and macOS and then 2-3 further ("big") distros which give a bit more room to experiment. All the other distros create confusion and analysis-paralysis for the user who wants to switch or wants to help others to do the switch.

--- (sorry for the long paragraph, i ranted and brain dumped the idea)

I see a problem: Even "stable" distros like Debian and big and "fully developed" DEs like KDE or GNOME arent ready for the majority of the users switching from windows.
Missing software compatibility and the need to fall back on the commandline are just some of the problems.
The biggest one is the confusion for the average user: They google "install Linux" and then need to do research for at least 30minutes, figuring out which of the popular distros is the right one for them. If decided, then (depending on the distro) they then have to choose the DE.

Its a sinilar problem to the adoption of the Fediverse: You are expected to decide what instance you want to be part of.
This makes it also very hard for a linux enthusiasts to convince/help install a distro for a family member, as you dont know their preferenced or how they use their Win/Mac machine. So either you as an expert have to observe and then do research on what distro+DE fits the usecase or the enduser themselves need to distro-hop, which is obviously not happening.

Now you are thinking: But just install Linux Mint and they probably do most of the things in their Browser anyways.

But in my experience the switch of potentially the browser, the mail-client and ontop of that the OS is a pretty tall ask for an average end user. So the whole switching thing becomes a multi year operation where they first switch the software they use to FOSS one. Which is a tall order and it makes it even harder to explain and convince someone.
Heck, it already takes multiple days to get my grandma up to speed after the change Win10 -> Win11, because some buttons moved and the context menue looks different.

Now my utopian idea:
If there were only a handful of popular distros+DEs, one could map them on a 2D-plane or even on a spectrum of "fixed, you have to adapt" to "flexible, you have to adjust the settings".
Mac users could switch to a distro which is quite fixed (comparable to macOS). This fixed distro should out of the box be close to the mac experience.
With windows the same.

Very very rough prototype of the spectrum to visualize my idea. I dont know enough about it but tried anyways:

flexible

Windows 10

MacOS

fixed

If then most of Linux Devs (from Kernel to distro to UI to software) mostly focus on the 4-5 main distros, then they would get more stable and they could be made to behave closer to their proprietary counterparts.

This then could make the switch from Mac/Win so much more easy because:

1. The distro is closer to the old proprietary OS. So the enduser just has to learn other "new" software, the OS doesnt demand a learning curve but just replicates the Win/Mac experience.
2. The decision which distro to use is easier, as there are the main ones which are easy to choose because they are distinct from one another.

Disclaimer: No, i am no expert, I probably dont know enough of the technical side, I just wanted to share the enduser experience.
Obviously there will always be countless distros by enthusiasts who tinker with their dozends of dev-friends for their personal-perfect distro. There will always be the people who deliberately do some frankensteined distro, and I am not here to forbid any of this.
The confusing diversity of all the options is just not helping the wider public.

Cool. So voting will continue being useless in Texas, but we're doing this to save the House majority in D.C.?

Texas GOP lawmakers released their first draft of the state’s new congressional map Wednesday, proposing revamped district lines that attempt to flip five Democratic seats in next year’s midterm elections.

The new map targets Democratic members of Congress in the Austin, Dallas and Houston metro areas and in South Texas. The draft, unveiled by Corpus Christi Republican Rep. Todd Hunter, will likely change before the final map is approved by both chambers and signed by Gov. Greg Abbott. Democrats have said they might try to thwart the process by fleeing the state.

This unusual mid-decade redistricting comes after a pressure campaign waged by President Donald Trump’s political team in the hopes of padding Republicans’ narrow majority in the U.S. House.

Currently, Republicans hold 25 of Texas’ 38 House seats. Trump carried 27 of those districts in 2024, including those won by Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar of Laredo and Vicente Gonzalez of McAllen.

Under the proposed new lines, 30 districts would have gone to Trump last year, each by at least 10 percentage points.

It's going to pass. As sure as Paxton was going to be acquitted.

On Monday, Mayor Patrick Collins of Cheyenne, Wyoming, announced plans for an AI data center that would consume more electricity than all homes in the state combined, according to The Associated Press. The facility, a joint venture between energy infrastructure company Tallgrass and AI data center developer Crusoe, would start at 1.8 gigawatts and scale up to 10 gigawatts of power use.

The project's energy demands are difficult to overstate for Wyoming, the least populous US state. The initial 1.8-gigawatt phase, consuming 15.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) annually, is more than five times the electricity used by every household in the state combined. That figure represents 91 percent of the 17.3 TWh currently consumed by all of Wyoming's residential, commercial, and industrial sectors combined. At its full 10-gigawatt capacity, the proposed data center would consume 87.6 TWh of electricity annually—double the 43.2 TWh the entire state currently generates.
>

Because drawing this much power from the public grid is untenable, the project will rely on its own dedicated gas generation and renewable energy sources, according to Collins and company officials. However, this massive local demand for electricity—even if self-generated—represents a fundamental shift for a state that currently sends nearly 60 percent of its generated power to other states.

Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon praised the project's potential benefits for the state's natural gas industry in a company statement. "This is exciting news for Wyoming and for Wyoming natural gas producers," Gordon said.

The proposed site for the new data center sits several miles south of Cheyenne near the Colorado border off US Route 85. While state and local regulators still need to approve the project, Collins expressed optimism about a quick start. "I believe their plans are to go sooner rather than later," he said.

The feedback from the First Nations leadership summit on the federal government’s push to build big projects — first introduced under Bill C-5 — has been almost universally negative. After attending last week’s gathering in Gatineau, Que., Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs provided a scathing, albeit representative, summary.

“The sole purpose of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s First Nations summit was to serve notice on Canada’s First Nations that Bill C-5 is now the law of the land,” Phillip said in a statement. “Further, First Nations are now expected to fully accept and accommodate that reality.” Or even more pointedly, Atikameksheng Anishnawbek First Nation Chief Craig Nootchtai called it a “subjugation session — not a consultation session.”

Neither of them were wrong.

~

But the day before I was due to depart, I received a notice from the organizers cancelling my participation, and apparently reneging on the commitment to reimburse me for my non-refundable flights and hotel.

And I wasn’t the only one. Chiefs of Ontario told the Canadian Press in a statement, “It’s disappointing that technical staff, experts and lawyers from organizations and First Nations who were going to attend this meeting were uninvited after they were allowed to register. They all spent money on travel and accommodations to support chiefs during this critical discussion.”

Two more men have come forward to accuse Christian rock superstar and Maga firebrand Michael Tait of drugging and sexually assaulting them – including Jason Jones, the founding manager of the American hard-rock band Evanescence.

Jones said he was fired from the band – which had ties to Tait – for speaking out about his alleged assault. Jones said the firing, which he claimed happened in 1999, cut him out of Evanescence’s massive success beginning in 2003.

“It destroyed me,” said Jones. “I was achieving my dreams at an early age, and Tait changed all that.”

Evanescence co-founder Ben Moody denied Jones was fired from the band for speaking out against Tait.

Moody said he does recall Jones telling him about a sexual encounter with Tait, but at the time Moody interpreted it as consensual.

“I was a kid, only 18, and clearly didn’t realize what he was going through,” Moody said. “I’m sure I missed a lot of things I’d recognize today. I didn’t realize he was traumatized.”