Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: ArtenBitcoin alredy established as legitimate curency. It's legal tender in El Salvador. Another country reportedly make it legal tender this year.

Yeah, I heard about the El Salvador thing. So . . . does anyone actually use it as legal tender? Go into the supermarket and pay with crypto? Lay a smidgen of a bitcoin on a street vendor for some tacos?
A loopy president can declare anything he wants. Doesn't make the problems with trying to use Bitcoin for normal transactions disappear.

Yes, they use it. Not everywhere yet, but you can go to some malls, street vendors, even McDonalds, or ride a taxi... It's batter chance to use bitcoin than credit card what i know.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: ertuqueque

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: Pendragon

Quoting: ertuquequeAt the risk of being boring or even worse, making people angry, I'll try to give my take on NFTs, what they are and how they have been exploited for bad things today…

^^This... using tokens on a cryptographic block chain has a use.. .just not a scammy money-making scheme that it seems to be used as these days.

I ask this in all seriousness... what use do NFTs have that would (at minimum) offset the negatives inherent in their creation and add tangible value to those purchasing them? A piggyback question would be, for whatever answer there exists to the first question, how has that not been utilized in over a year?

Let me start with a couple of basics…

First of all, the simplest analogy I could come up to explain NFTs to a friend is: Imagine Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency, but with a "skin" to make it "unique" or different from the other ones".

Now, following that same over-simplified concept, an NFT is a "coin" stored in a blockchain… So the usefulness of an NFT depends more or less on 3 things:

1.- What cryptocurrency is being used to "mint" that NFT. The more reliable and decentralized the cryptocurrency, the more reliable that NFT could (I stress the word COULD) be.
2.- Who is creating, promoting and delivering that NFT. Again, the more "serious" and reliable the entity, the more reliable the NFT.
3.- What's the purpose of that said NFT… An NFT could be as useless as a monkey avatar, or as useful as a certificate of ownership for a house!

So let's assume all 3 points are good:
1.- The NFT is based on something like the Ethereum blockchain (Bitcoin still doesn't support the creation of NFTs, not yet).
2.- The entity creating those NFTs is a well known real estate company that is fully compliant with all legal duties in the jurisdictions it operates.
3.- Those NFTs are digital certificates that are legally bonded to a real life property (let's say a house in Beverly Hills!).

As you can imagine, for NFTs to be really useful in real life, there needs to be a legal framework supporting them, which is something that as far as I know, doesn't exists anywhere yet… but I'm sure we'll get there; with NFTs, another iteration of the concept or something different, but still based in an open, decentralized, borderless and censorship resistant blockchain.

Today's iteration of NFTs are just attempts of using a really cool technology… in the most idiotic and incompetent way.

The technology just need to mature and evolve for another 5 to 10 years, hopefully people will come around and accept that is the future.

Yes... but you are still basing NFTs usefulness to crypto currency. Crypto currency, itself, still has not gained any true functionality and that has existed for over a decade of time. The oldest crypto, (to my knowledge, Bitcoin) hasn't even established itself as a truly legitimate currency. Those few businesses that even attempted to utilize Bitcoin for it's supposed purpose have stopped leaving, for the most part, shady dealers and investors. ~Functionally~, Bitcoin is dead (and I say this as someone who has capital in the crypto)

So, I come back to the original question I posed...
what use do NFTs have that would (at minimum) offset the negatives inherent in their creation and add tangible value to those purchasing them?

From what I've been able to gather, you cannot buy NFTs without crypto (a method of obtaining an item, I may add, that's not unlike the shady practice in video games of requiring players to purchase "premium currency" to obtain a skin, booster, or other game item that developers of such games have come out and said these items "have no inherent value"). For the "average" user, this would make the process of even obtaining an NFT not worth the hassle. If as person cannot see an item and make a simple transaction to obtain it, most won't. This leaves the majority of buyers as those who already owns crypto currency to begin with, or is technologically savvy enough and willing enough to deal with the conversion process. In short, this would be like telling someone in the US looking to purchase an item from, say, Aliexpress, that they first have to go to the bank and exchange their USD to Renminbi (I hope that's right. I had to look up the name of the money in China), and only THEN can they make a purchase on Aliexpress... most people wouldn't bother.

Hypothetically, NFTs *do* allow for the purchase of some form of unique digital asset that can be transferred between (as an example I'd been given before) digital worlds such as Meta's worlds, or online games, however, this would only work if all such developers collaborated developed their games to BE inter-compatible with such content, but, seeing as that would require all participating developers to share a marketplace, I seriously doubt multiple game/world development companies will collaborate in such a manner. Instead they'd keep to their own islands, making the digital NFT useless outside of said island (much like cosmetics and boosters are already, without the need of NFTs)

Furthermore, the NFTs do not prevent digital content from being copied, or deleted. All of the digital artwork, for example, can easily be duplicated with a simple "Save Image As", for the most part... one of the biggest black eyes to NFTs, in fact, it the "minting" of such tokens against artwork not owned or copyrighted by the NFT minter and without the knowledge of such owner. This damaging much, if any legitimacy of NFTs to most.

I do not understand using NFTs as receipts for owning land, or concert tickets, given the current mechanisms do that, more or less, work just fine without the power consumptive overhead of NFT generation or their comparatively long transaction times.

So, once again... I totally understand you believe in NFTs (or, it seems you do). What use does an NFT give that has tangible value that is either not possible at present, or that NFTs do better than current systems?

Bitcoin alredy established as legitimate curency. It's legal tender in El Salvador. Another country reportedly make it legal tender this year. What you want more then country acepting bitcoin as curency?

For NFT, there are legitimate purposes for usage. For example game account for online games respecting privacy and transfeereble between servers. Right now is in development RGB, with it you can create decoupled ownership data (on BTC blockchain) and token data (in json file). You have your privkey so you can proof that you own account stored with all data on json file which you has on disk.

So with this, server get your data only when you play (your file) it and they can give you actuallisation transaction which you commit to network and also they can discard all your data when you are offline. More privacy for you. On blockchain is just 1 small transaction with hash.
Another use case is, that, you can have game with opensource server with transfer option. In this case you have offical server and also couple of unofficial servers, so you can grab youre 90lvl paladin and go to play on unoficial server. If official server trust that unofficial they can use your progress when you upload your character file or they can just use last trusted state.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elgatilMmm, I was wondering.. Step 2 is just placing a certain file in a certain dir so, couldn't proton take care of that? (And actually you could control which dir is it by changing the environment variable LD_LIBRARY_PATH) It would remove step 2 and 3 which are the most annoying I think.

Version of anticheat with game is compiled probably need match version of library. Don't know if there is way how proton can get version... and if some game stop updating anticheat, you need multiple libraries...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: nullzero

Quoting: Arten

The Steam Deck is interesting, as any developer / publisher we've seen actually receive a devkit unit has been practically universally praising the device. Seeing is truly believing then.

It's called selection bias. Only developers interested in steamdeck try to get one and so they are more likely prise it. Ones who are more likely criticize it don't want it, so they don't have one.
I expect great device, but but this survey shows that our view can be influenced by the fact that we hear only positive news.

Thing here is those devs didn't buy any. The units simply poped up in their mailbox, courtesy of Valve Inc.

The bias here, is trying to figure out how many devs got it, and posted no evidence online! :cry:

They still need ask Valve for one. That is somethink only devs with interest do.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The Steam Deck is interesting, as any developer / publisher we've seen actually receive a devkit unit has been practically universally praising the device. Seeing is truly believing then.

It's called selection bias. Only developers interested in steamdeck try to get one and so they are more likely prise it. Ones who are more likely criticize it don't want it, so they don't have one.
I expect great device, but but this survey shows that our view can be influenced by the fact that we hear only positive news.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 14

Quoting: Arten

Quoting: BielFPsDoes users need to do something to enable Futex2 benefits, besides installing Kernel >=5.16 and the latest version of proton?

You have manjaro. You alredy have it on your computer :-)

I don't think you can take that for granted with the way Manjaro handles kernel installations. That, and not everyone runs updates daily.

They have it long time now. Futex patches are for example also in 5.10 from oct 27. 2020. So in 5.10 is probably older version, but its there. So he has it in some form probably.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BielFPsDoes users need to do something to enable Futex2 benefits, besides installing Kernel >=5.16 and the latest version of proton?

You have manjaro. You alredy have it on your computer :-)
here is for example 5.15 on gitlab with patches which they apply. 0103-futex.patch file its there :-)
https://gitlab.manjaro.org/packages/core/linux515 [External Link]

I searched for it when i runned steam under terminal and it displayed game/proton using it :-)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Tuxee

Quoting: MayeulC

Quoting: HoolyI think so too, they are probably using an A/B-model, which means that you have two installations of the OS at every time
[...]
Or they use btrfs-subvolumes and allocate storage dynamically.

Not exactly, they run on ostree, like Fedora Silverblue. It's a bit like a git repo, or guix/nix. It has deduplication, rollback, versioning, atomic updates. That's really promising tech, I'd have picked the same.

Let's try to come up with a basic estimate

• Base Arch Install: 100 MiB


• LLVM plus mesa: 300 MiB


• Web browser: 200 MiB


• Steam: 300 MiB


• Proton: 600 MiB


• KDE Plasma plus base KDE applications: 2 GiB


• Base Flatpak runtimes (freedesktop.org, VAAPI, mesa): 700 MiB

Total: 4.2 GiB. I'm falling short, but there could be more pre-installed software like Discord, plus probably a boot partition (might be a btrfs subvolume, not sure which FS they use), and possibly a "system restore" partition that might double the size, although I would personally make that a webinstall at about 150MiB.

Any other ideas?

Where did you get a base install size of 100MiB? Granted, I am on Ubuntu but

• the minimal kernel alone (no modules) requires 110MB of disc space. Add some kernel modules, firmware, basic libraries and GNU tools...


• Browser? Which one? Firefox comes in at around 250MiB, Chromium is considerably larger.


• Steam? Runtime and libs - we are getting into GiBs without any Proton version (bin32 - 800+MiB, bin64 - 300MiB,...)


• Mesa? The 64bit libgl1-mesa-dri reports 456MB, the i386 version 439MB plus Vulkan drivers. llvm clocks in at 100MiB per architecture.

That's Ubuntu, but I seriously doubt that Arch can do with a mere fraction of these binary sizes.

They know device, so they can use more aggressive approach for steam deck images.
Can be mesa compiled only with limited GPUs support? Lot of code is common, but they know GPU which they want support, so they don't need support for older architectures then RDNA 2.
Other point is, do they need LLVM, or they just can use ACO for everything which is needed to do on device?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: Arten

Windows 11 needs 64GB

Its minimal requirement, not real usage. Clean w11 has 21.1 GB [External Link].

But truth is, windows don't have preinstalled steam...

Just like Windows 10, it will eat storage for breakfast for updates, that's the realistic number given by MSFT to ensure it runs properly.

Still i dont think they count whole 64GB just for windows.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Windows 11 needs 64GB

Its minimal requirement, not real usage. Clean w11 has 21.1 GB [External Link].

But truth is, windows don't have preinstalled steam...

View this comment - View article - View full comments