If he suddenly really wants to do his laundry one morning, don’t ask questions. (Wet dreams and embarassment being the context here.)

That’s about all I can think of that’s gendered, really.

I was ~9 when I got the talk from my Dad, and it was basic stuff about just the mechanics. It set things up so that, around 13, I went to him with questions about how I was feeling re: puberty. So even now it’ll be helpful to do the talk and show that you’re available as a resource.

In your case, your son likely has some idea from internet pornography and whatever he got in school, but it would still be helpful to go through the basics with him. I’d frame it as “I’m sure you know most of this, but i just want to make sure you know what’s important.” It might also be helpful to make clear that pornography is as much acting as TV is - don’t set his expectations on it, it’s people faking things for money.

Going over the importance of condom use also helpful at his age. Keep in mind, it’s not necessarily about what he’s going to use right away, but making sure he knows when he does need to know.

Then, I’d just be there for him and ask if he has any questions, and answer them frankly. Tell him he can come back later if he’s unsure.

It’s awkward and tough I’m sure, but it’ll be a help not just now, but going forward. Good luck!

Damn I’m stealing that

Aggressively seconding this. If you can just do a step in a bash command, do that, don’t use the stupid yaml wrapper they provide that actually just turns around and runs the same bash command but with extra abstraction to learn, break, fix, and maintain for stupid, meaningless upgrades. It will save you time because you’ll be using better-tested, more widely-used tools and approaches.

“update doc to reflect reality still more”

A negative income tax system has the same incentive as our current bracketed tax system to earn more money: for every dollar you earn, even if a higher percentage gets taken out on that next dollar, you still have more money now.

It just shifts our brackets down so that you get “negatively taxed” - given money - for the lowest brackets of income. But a person making $100k would still be given say $15k for the first $10k of their income, $5k for next $10k, taxed at 9% for the next $10k, 20% the following $10k, so on and so forth - so that every dollar they make still means more money in their pocket, it’s just a percentage less for the additional dollars as they move brackets. Considering that’s already how it works, it seems no incentive changes would arise for high earners.

This is the “Negative Income Tax”, popularized by famously conservative Federal Reserve chair Milton Friedman as the approach to community support that best meshed with supply/demand.

Your hypothesis is an intuitive and common fear, and so has been studied before and found insubstantial, with Canada’s “Mincome” experiment being one of the most notable: in the 70s Canada targeted members of a town with a minimum income for five years, and saw results like people opening businesses with loans they could get now that they could cite the income. Where they saw people leaving jobs, it was often for education - their high school enrollment hit 100% for the senior year for the first time ever, due to the kids not needing to help bring in money. It was ended during a fiscal crisis when the government was looking for places to tighten belts. This BBC article is a good read on it, focused on the positive health impact.

It’s convenient. Can’t hurt to get used to it, for sure, in that it’s useful to not have to go through dependency hell installing things sometimes. It’s based on kernel features I don’t see Linus pulling out, so I think you’ll only see it more.

As someone who runs nix-only at home, I mostly use its underlying tech in the form of snaps/flatpaks, though. I use docker itself at work constantly, but at home, snaps/flatpaks tend to do the “minimize thinking about dependencies and building” bit but in a workflow more convenient for desktop applications.