Where they are doing that? The author is just implying things (or just asking questions), but is perfectly normal the investment be reduced from one year to another.
Is paying ungodly amounts to the CEO whilst firing employees and losing market share normal to you?
I don't like it at all, but it is literally what the entire market is doing, it is just another day in the field. Also, the 5 million from CEO is literally nothing compared to 200m from their software development, if we pay zero to CEO, what will change? Almost nothing.
Is claiming Mozilla relies on donations whilst in fact this is a lie normal to you?
They probably rely on donations because ppl like you, and the author of the article you linked, cannot admit that Mozilla can invest in projects like thunderbird or common voice which are actually very interesting projects but do not give them money, and it is interesting that you do that while complaining that they aren´t a non-profit organization enough, so what, you want them to focus on profit or not? You and the author seem that just want to complain.
I felt it in the middle of the article without knowing him previously. He put the tactical of "just asking questions" all over the place, even over things that seem innocuous just to create polemic.
Why does Mozilla seem unconcerned with alienating a large portion of their user base (which is already shrinking)?
Where the fuck mozilla is "alienating" their user base.
I prefer games with established characters over blank-slate character creator types.
I think I never disagree so much with something hahaha.
The dragonborn and tarnished are just coat-racks to hang armor on.
Well, for me here is just a question of creativity and how much you want to put in your character. Personally, I can´t play a lot of these games with established characters cause they aren't me, they are they and anything I do will not change the fact that he is Gerald with his history, motivations, and willingness, so why do I play exactly? Just to see what will happen cause in the end he will still be Gerald, not me, not my character.
Afaik you can, I was using a KDE hack back in the day but it appeared to increase a lot of my perception of tearing in games and enable vsync were having no effect
These glitches made me quit the nvidia+wayland combo, it was more prevalent in xWayland applications but it was bad, really bad, discord after some time was just chaotic stuff, it was frame 2 then frame 1, then frame 4, then frame 3, just bizarre.
Well, starting with, if you own an original copy. Sometimes companies put stupid DRMs in some digital stuff that just make the life of buyers miserable, games love to do that. For me is always ethical to pirate these ones.
Second, anything that you don't have money to buy, if you will never buy this stuff I can´t see why is bad to pirate, you are not stealing anyone, and I know a lot of cases (me included) that a person pirated something to test and then buy the thing after.
Education, similar to the prior, if a book or anything is not affordable to ppl that are willing to study an area, for me is totally ethical to pirate, this is a very common situation in third world countries where the dollar is very expensive causing books that are imported to be too expensive to students.
Not so, if you are OK using x11 you will probably have zero issues. Wayland support, however, is shit. I had a 1660 super when I switched and it was good. Just when I had two monitors with different refresh rates it get weird, x11 does not support it at all (there is some workarounds but they are workarounds). Wayland fix the issue but nvidia support for Wayland was veeery bad at the end of last year, when I switched to AMD.
The thing about being open source is just that the community could help move things faster and would not need to wait the good will of nvidia for everithing, but nvidia is still moving slow towards open source, it does not means that they aren't doing things and fixing bugs, just they are a bit slow and stubborn
Just the good old stock market gently asking for infinite growth. You can´t just be profitable these days, shareholders prefer to kill a profitable business that does not grow constantly.
I'm making no comments about you making or no comments on centOS being repurposed. I'm just saying that this blown-up is probably caused by a mixture of miscommunication between RHEL and a community that feels like being tossed aside, I just said that because you said that you felt unjustified.
You can just ask with an intrusive pop up first time after installation so everyone will always see. If ppl still opt-out... Idk... Maybe we respect it.
But it is also another stab in the community, they took centos that was a community project for them, then transformed this project that was downstream to upstream, then called all other downstream distros a negative net worth cause they don't engage in the process of RHEL, then blocked the acess to this distros to the downstream, then reject the work of this ppl they called net negative without a decent process.
What actually red hat wants?
Centos now is only a beta branch? Ppl who wants derive from centos should be fixing everything downstream and duplicate work cause centos now is just an internal beta from red hat? If yes, why they took the project from the community? I'm not a rpm based distros user but I totally understand why ppl are pissed.
Where they are doing that? The author is just implying things (or just asking questions), but is perfectly normal the investment be reduced from one year to another.
I don't like it at all, but it is literally what the entire market is doing, it is just another day in the field. Also, the 5 million from CEO is literally nothing compared to 200m from their software development, if we pay zero to CEO, what will change? Almost nothing.
They probably rely on donations because ppl like you, and the author of the article you linked, cannot admit that Mozilla can invest in projects like thunderbird or common voice which are actually very interesting projects but do not give them money, and it is interesting that you do that while complaining that they aren´t a non-profit organization enough, so what, you want them to focus on profit or not? You and the author seem that just want to complain.