Quoting: MohandevirI have a new RX 580 to test streaming with. Anyone know if the Mesa drivers are doing a good streaming job?

Unfortunately, hardware encoding is not yet supported with Mesa drivers :/
https://github.com/ValveSoftware/steam-for-linux/issues/4890

So it's running software-only, making use of a lot of CPU.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I have a fairly recent Sony Bravia TV and the input latency is far better with dedicated Steam Link than with the Steam Link Android app. This is sad.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: ripperDoes anyone understand how co-op streaming from Steam Link works? I guess it needs to be supported by the game?

Also, using an android phone as a touch controller - does that mean that the phone then appears basically as a touchpad to the Link/game?

Steam Link Touch Controller Guide
https://steamcommunity.com/app/353380/discussions/4/1735462352489233412/

Thanks. That does feel like I have to use the Steam Link app on Android and stream into the phone, in order to use the phone as a controller. I imagined I'd use my physical Steam Link box to stream to the TV, and use the Android phone as a controller (so that I don't need to buy that many, e.g. for guests), but that doesn't seem to a supported use case.

Do you also know of a good info for the co-op streaming from Steam Link?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Does anyone understand how co-op streaming from Steam Link works? I guess it needs to be supported by the game?

Also, using an android phone as a touch controller - does that mean that the phone then appears basically as a touchpad to the Link/game?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Does anybody know whether buying it from their homepage gives you a DRM-free copy, or just a Steam link? They don't say.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Does this have the same improvements as the Enhanced Edition, i.e. higher resolutions and mouselook?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: ripperPublic domain is open source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_license#Public_domain_as_open_source_license

Did you even read what you linked? It specifically mentioned a license that was accepted. In this case, the developer is not using that license, they're rolling their own "do what you want" text, which still is not open source. Public domain in their eyes, not in wider legal eyes.

Of course I did. If CC0 is considered open source, why wouldn't "vanilla" public domain be considered open source? I believe that saying "I hereby give up all rights on this work and place it into the public domain" makes the intent very clear. I don't think anyone would win at court suing someone for copyright, if he/she provided such a statement with his/her work. Of course, none of us are lawyers. Also, I haven't bought the game so I don't know what their source code says. I just see "open source" written on the website.

Edit: I looked up this more, and here's an opinion agreeing with you:
https://opensource.org/node/878
and here's one agreeing with me:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html.en#PublicDomain
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html.en

Both state that using something like CC0 is a much preferable solution, which I completely agree with. In the end, I guess I wouldn't outright say that public domain is or is not open source, but rather say that there's no proper/standardized license attached, which might be problematic in certain cases.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Public domain is open source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_license#Public_domain_as_open_source_license

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Unfortunately they also broke the game at least under Fedora (missing libsndio library) and don't respond to bug reports.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: ripperHave you seen what https://flattr.com has done with Flattr 2.0?

Last time I used flattr, we had them up for quite a long time and they paid out like £10 once during that time. It just wasn't worth it. The problem with all these smaller payment systems is that we need to hit the threshold on each of them to get a payment, plus I then need to add in the time expense for dealing with taxes for each additional revenue stream and it can get a little messy.

Yes, I understand. However, if we don't give these smaller systems a chance, they can never grow. It seems to me that they tried hard to have the whole functionality hassle-free for both the creator and the reader with Flattr 2.0. And I quite like their system, it's much better than Patreon - you have a single pool of money that is distributed proportionally how much you use different websites. You don't need to keep track whether you still visit some site or still want to support that particular person, if you stop going there (and start going somewhere else), the person stops receiving money (and somebody else starts). Is including these smaller revenue streams in tax return that much work? By the way, GOL already receives flattrs from me on each my visit since last month - they're just nullified because GOL owner is not registered.

View this comment - View article - View full comments