Quoting: flesk

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: JuliusThanks for all the effort.

In the long run please consider running a federated Lemmy instance ( https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy [External Link] ) instead of your regular forum :)

This looks interesting, but . . . from that page I went to their webpage, and I can't figure out how to contact them to tell them there's a grammatical error in their top paragraph of their front page. They do have a "contact us" thingie, but when I went there it turns out I'm not cool enough to contact them if I don't already use Mastodon or whatever. Doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth, and doesn't make me think they're likely to be good at building a social network.

It's not the use of the Oxford comma?

No. The github page has a link to
https://join.lemmy.ml/ [External Link]
where they say

Lemmy isn't just a reddit alternative; its a network of interconnected communities ran by different people and organizations

They mean "run" not "ran". Now that I look at it again, they're missing an apostrophe on "it's" as well. Two grammar mistakes in one sentence at the top of your front page does not make you look pro. And no, I'm not going to learn how to fiddle with github just to help some people fix something who I've already started to dislike precisely because they've made it impossible for me to just email them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: JuliusThanks for all the effort.

In the long run please consider running a federated Lemmy instance ( https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy [External Link] ) instead of your regular forum :)

This looks interesting, but . . . from that page I went to their webpage, and I can't figure out how to contact them to tell them there's a grammatical error in their top paragraph of their front page. They do have a "contact us" thingie, but when I went there it turns out I'm not cool enough to contact them if I don't already use Mastodon or whatever. Doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth, and doesn't make me think they're likely to be good at building a social network.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: SalvatosThat looks like it could be fun on Remote Play Together!

Quoting: aokamiI bought it last week, couldn't wait, will the purchase count towards a Linux sale ? (What about gifts ? Is there literature on how steam sort sales types ?)

I believe it goes according to the platform you’ve played it the most on during the first week, so it’s probably too late to do anything about it.

True, but Proton counts as Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Thinking of nostalgia, the saga of this has been so long that I feel nostalgic about it even though it's not out yet.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

So if the "NVIDIA Encoder" is 7th generation, but the "NVIDIA Decoder" is only 5th generation, does that mean the chip can't decode things it encodes? :wink:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: GuestEvery product is different and the ideology is the least important difference between them.

This statement involves at least two major misconceptions. The first is about the nature of the word "important" as it relates to individuals' choices. Obviously, you cannot define for another person what is important to them. If their values are different from yours, what is important to them will also be different. People have different needs and so on. So for instance, if I'm buying a consumer product, it may be important to me that it be purple (note my handle). But I would not claim to you that purpleness is the most important feature of that consumer product and you are a fool making a mistake if you fail to get a purple one. I accept that, for whatever perverse reason, for many people purpleness just isn't that important. So saying ideology is, or is not, important to someone else's choice is in a basic sense a category error.

The other is about the nature and implications of ideology. An ideology is an understanding of how the world works, in a political and economic sense, combined with some values. If you have an ideology, inevitably it has implications about how the world should work--it might imply that the world should work exactly how it does work, although given how it does work that would be kind of a crappy ideology.
I say "if", but in fact everyone has an ideology. "Pragmatists" who imagine they do not have one are, in reality, just practising some received ideology they do not understand because they absorbed it without thinking about it. You might say instead of them having an ideology, it has them. Refusing to think through what your ideology is or, if you do, to take any actions derived from it, is basically a matter of passivity--accepting that you will be acted on, not an actor, and that the world will be the way all the people who do act cause it to be. Now that's OK in a way, but people who abdicate their agency that way shouldn't be getting on the case of people who have thought things through and do have positions.

Basically, if you haven't reached an understanding of the world or can't be bothered to act in ways consistent with it, shut up when those of us who do know what we're talking about and do have some consistency with our beliefs are talking.

There are various misconceptions in your comment:

1. When we are talking about buying products we shouldn't just look at that one specific thing as the deciding factor - especially when we want to build a gaming PC. This is what I was trying to tell to people but it seems like it fell on deaf ears. If you want a good purchase then you should be really careful what you buy because marketing exists and it is ready to bait you with illusions. Yes, people want different things but ultimately people want features and not vaporware or other illusions.

2. An ideology is nothing just a set of ideas - a dream. "No Tux No Bux", "Free Software for all", "The year of the linux desktop" - how are those working out? Back to square one: people want features which get things done. Ideologies might give you some drive and they might cripple your capabilities but nothing more. Linux rules the server space because of its capabilities. I thought that it is sensible to think that GamingOnLinux.com would focus on gaming but it seems like politics is more important in this community. But you can see that you can only get so far with your ideologies but without political power: linux gaming is pretty much on life support. Proton keeps it alive but for how long? Valve created linux gaming because they saw it as a not-windows-but-kinda-works alternative. Businesses evaluate business capabilities and then they invest. The FSF tries to promote "user freedom" with linux and other free software and yet there are many who say linux is not about choice - who is right and who is wrong? Or is it just another grey area? In the end, we depend on companies. Developers get paid to do things professionally because our charities are just small change.

3. No, not everyone has an ideology and operating through ideologies is not a rational thing to do. Ideologies are just restrictions: it's one thing to think you know how the world should work and another thing how it would be better. It's childish to assume that someone knows how to do things the best way. Yes, we might know how some things but in the end we should strive for what is the best for everyone and for that we need to carefully evaluate our decisions. Of course, if you just want to follow a set of conventions in which people already decided everything for you then you can do that too!

4. Telling people to "shut up" won't make them shut up or think differently - whether you like what they say or not. And it definitely won't make them listen to you, especially if you say absurd things like how you "reached an understanding of the world" :grin:

You are describing your ideology while claiming not to have one. Kind of underlines most of what I said.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestEvery product is different and the ideology is the least important difference between them.

This statement involves at least two major misconceptions. The first is about the nature of the word "important" as it relates to individuals' choices. Obviously, you cannot define for another person what is important to them. If their values are different from yours, what is important to them will also be different. People have different needs and so on. So for instance, if I'm buying a consumer product, it may be important to me that it be purple (note my handle). But I would not claim to you that purpleness is the most important feature of that consumer product and you are a fool making a mistake if you fail to get a purple one. I accept that, for whatever perverse reason, for many people purpleness just isn't that important. So saying ideology is, or is not, important to someone else's choice is in a basic sense a category error.

The other is about the nature and implications of ideology. An ideology is an understanding of how the world works, in a political and economic sense, combined with some values. If you have an ideology, inevitably it has implications about how the world should work--it might imply that the world should work exactly how it does work, although given how it does work that would be kind of a crappy ideology.
I say "if", but in fact everyone has an ideology. "Pragmatists" who imagine they do not have one are, in reality, just practising some received ideology they do not understand because they absorbed it without thinking about it. You might say instead of them having an ideology, it has them. Refusing to think through what your ideology is or, if you do, to take any actions derived from it, is basically a matter of passivity--accepting that you will be acted on, not an actor, and that the world will be the way all the people who do act cause it to be. Now that's OK in a way, but people who abdicate their agency that way shouldn't be getting on the case of people who have thought things through and do have positions.

Basically, if you haven't reached an understanding of the world or can't be bothered to act in ways consistent with it, shut up when those of us who do know what we're talking about and do have some consistency with our beliefs are talking.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sounds like a nice, solid solution, not a kludge. The kind of thing that not only solves the specific problem we have today, but will also work for other, similar problems we might have tomorrow.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tmtvl

Quoting: Luke_NukemopenSUSE has been using it by default for years. It works fine and is a lifesaver with snapper and the ability to boot previous snaps.

Quoting: shorbergopenSUSE have done done it for a few years now, seems to generally work fine. It is also better tuned to be used as a default for the general masses than ext4 these days since it allows things like checksumming, compression, snapshots and copy-on-write while still being a widely used and integrated system compared to say ZFS.

I would like to third this argument plus add that being able to turn off COW in btrfs submodules is really useful for stuff like /var.

If I had a cow it would probably be useful to be able to turn it off.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: vskyeLast night, I read something about the United Nations having a plan for their Agenda 21 that by the year 2030, they'll have it that governments and major corporations will own everything.

They already do.
But it didn't have much to do with the United Nations, which is a talking shop that does little but, with a couple of important exceptions (eg Libya) does on average more good than harm. Theories that the United Nations is going to impose some big bad thing on us all fundamentally misunderstand the nature of both the United Nations and international political economy. The United Nations has a tiny budget that depends on voluntary national contributions, no taxation powers, indeed very few powers of any kind. The only powers of coercion available to the United Nations depend on all the permanent members of the Security Council to agree about something. Since the US decided it couldn't live without the Cold War and started it up again, it can't get Russia or China to let them push any important coercive measures through the Security Council, and similarly there's no way the US would fail to veto anything important Russia or China wanted, so the Security Council is for the foreseeable future effectively a dead letter for anything big.

In short, the UN is not a significant player in international politics or economics. In the sense of some sort of autonomous political force with its own separate agenda the UN doesn't even exist. It's a category error--it's like talking about what the house of Congress plans, independent of either the Democratic or Republican parties and their Congresscritters. The UN is a creature of all the national governments that fund it; it's a place where they can argue and try to influence the little departments that do research and produce reports the media talks about, so they can score points off each other when some human rights rapporteur says bad things about the other guy. Occasionally they'll also let something like the World Health Organization do a bit of the real work they're hypothetically supposed to be doing, because most sane people agree it needs to be done. That's it, that's about all the UN is. It's not a bogeyman with vast plans.

View this comment - View article - View full comments