I use a windows VM with OVMF passthrough. For maximum convenience, I reused my old rx 580 as windowsbox dedicated passthrough gpu, with 8gb of RAM.
It works like a charm. Anything on Linux that can't be run smoothly, VM solves it, at the convenience juat starting the VM when I need it, then close and go on with my day. I also use tiling WM so I can assign the VM to its own workspace, fullscreen and everything, so theres very little friction.
Encourage anyone that is in this situation to try it out, for from what i've seen, the problem is more of compatibility niche problems than actually something inherently wrong with Linux.
Consent doesnt mean agree in this context tho. And it is debatable whether using is consenting. Do I consent to all the shady shit Microsoft was pulling when I install windows? (Looking at the number of debloaters and their received support from community, that seems like a no)
This, want it or not, it is not hard for boys to feel incredibly alienated in the left hemisphere. We gone from "girls have issues too" to "only girls can have issues". It's ridiculous, and even more ridiculous when you remember that girls reach their growth spurt sooner than boys, effectively eliminating many of the purported advantages of boys over girl, making them feel even more alienated.
And yet it seems to me only GNOME has this problem, and it has been there since Torvalds still publicly executing everyone in mailing list. XFCE, LXQT, hell, even KDE only has minimal complain about unexpected behavior. It seems to me that in a concerted effort to predict as much user behavior as possible, GNOME created this non existent "average user" that conforms to no one, and created this mess on their own.
Also, we are mostly against nonconsensual, non-explicit, or opt-out type of feedback. As far as I concern, efforts to point out to GNOME devs their faults are many to the point its a meme. It is also, not unrelatedly, a meme that GNOME denies these complaints because "the average users wouldn't get it") . I think it should be clear enough by now.
It's almost like the other side would have some sound arguments even if their resolution isn't right or something!
Go infiltrate right wing media. Ask them what they think about Centrism. What y'all need to understand is that Centrism is an umbrella term for all who can't identify with either side. That means that yes, if you come at a centrist criticizing the right or left or centrist while being the other side, chances are they will never 100% agree with you. Thats how it is. Even within Centrism opposite ideas fight and coexist because thats what defines it: we don't align ourselves with any side but ourselves alone, even the idea of Centrism, if it exists. To reiterate, Centrism is not the right side, it never was a side, but simply an umbrella term to call "the unaligned". Well except for Radical Centrism, which is not Centrism, despite its name.
Maybe when we can finally separate ideas from our identities, politics would be remotely constructive from the hellhole it is today.
Lutris install + installing wine-lol-bin from AUR as runner has been working near flawlessly for me. Only the event page sometimes bug out, but I never participating one so it doesnt bother me.
It's funny how people think both this and states 4chan has always been rightwing since 2000s. The truth is your political bias says nothing about your intelligence. Stating otherwise just looks like boosting one's ego to me.
Also the reason you don't see right wing opinions on Lemmy is probably by and large because the right wing instances are being defederated by larger left-leaning Lemmy instances. Not saying if thats wrong, but that's just how it is.
In theory 599 looks a lot less than 600 subconsciously iirc.
But Linux is good at backward compatibility tho. Linus Torvalds leadership made sure that very few if at all any changes to the kernel will break existing userland. This means that if you have a program with their needed dependencies in the right version (which is easy with docker/flatpak/appimage) your programs will run flawlessly even if they are from the 90s.
In the grand scheme of things I guess it is not. The problem is that statement is infalsifiable, like the Last Thursdayism theory. Therefore, it falls into more of philosophical space, where Occam's Razor would eliminate this because the alternative requires less assumption. It isn't wrong, it just requires much more assumptions to be correct in order to work.
I don't think you are missing anything except the creeping in scope of the term "Linux" to exclude what they don't like. Embedded Linux works with 0 GUI, and dont conforms to Freedesktop standards (obviously), yet it's ridiculous for anyone to argue that isnt Linux. Alpine Linux also do not use GNU land, yet saying it is not "Linux" is also asinine. ChromeOS imo is Linux, it's locked down Linux, but Linux nonetheless.
Im just here waiting for the inevitable reverse of this reverse meme. Real question, and maybe its just this extreme luck of mine: have anyone of you guys actually see a significant body of smugly Arch users put it in your face, because I havent seen one but i've seen this meme idea for the nth times now. Hiw is this any different from "I use Ubuntu btw"?
i'll play devil's advocate and say: None of them. Programming languages are tools, and so treat them like one is better. A better question to ask is: what are you doing to need one? Then work out the characteristic of a tool you want. E.g: you want to make a game, lets say you want to use Unity, then learning C# would be the best answer. Or you want to start with godot, maybe because it's friendly to you, then learning go would be the obvious choice. Just pick one that you rationalized is best, doesn't matter if it's faulty reasoning, then go all the way with it is the best approach here imo.
Thats incorrect too, the real answer is that its undefined. Infinity only is the correct answer if you only examine it from the positive side, so limit of a/x as x goes to 0 is infinity, but if x starts out as negative, the answer would be negative infitnity, causing a logical paradox.
I just drop it. Very little reason to use it when my ~/bin is nothing but shell script. If I made the script with the intention to share, .bash for bash specific script, .sh for POSIX compliant script.
Because Manjaro isnt exactly as it seems. Sometimes it's the worst of both worlds. I wont deny that it is convenient but (Rant alert) : The idea of delay Arch packages for testing seems nice at first, until you take in the fact Manjaro will have to push some of the packages out before that period for e.g: security reasons, while some might take longer. The thing is, upstream Arch repo is designed to work together only on the packages upstream version, and as per Archwiki said, partial upgrade is highly unrecommended, and it is not uncommon to update your manjarobox and everything went smoothly, until you reboot and fallen into a dependency hell. Sometimes it can cause serious security issues. And with that in mind, the AUR also works with the assumption that you are on Arch's upstream packages, not Manjaro one, and well, dont need to tell you how it can cause problems down the line.
If you want a good convenient no "nerd" fuss distros, I recommend Pop!OS, Mint, or even Debian. If you really want to use AUR (trust me it's not as special as most expect, you generally only want to go there when you must) and really don't wanna use Arch, there's projects like Antergos, Artix,... that have much more sane approach.
I acknowledge tho that I 100% believe Manjaro users can get perfectly stable experience, and these things I mentioned had never be inside their scope. It's just you can get very similar experience with better management even in Arch-derived space, so why not go for those instead?