Yes, currently Valve is mostly interesting in a base system that just runs Steam and games, not a general Linux desktop. Commercial Linux distributions are more about servers and professional workstations.
We either need PC hardware manufacturers or public funding to push Linux desktop, since I don't think that normal users would pay directly for a Linux system.
PC hardware manufacturers however are more about selling the next device that constantly improving a system non-customers could also use for free, so I doubt they would commit to it fully, and instead use it for marketing.
I don't think that there is any one issue that hurts the Linux desktop, I think it is more a matter of death by a thousand cuts.
I think for the Linux desktop to be (more) successful we need dedicated QA teams, with a direct connection to usability developers that constantly test and write automated tests for the whole integration on different hardware, and fix any issue as well.
What? P2P is more hackable? Hacking just one central server is more difficult than hacking multiple P2P clients that check each other? That seems like strange reasoning. This really depends on the implementation, sure you can make it insecure, but you can also make it more secure.
And why wouldn't you want to host your own games when you want to play them together with others?
Hosting your own games also gives you much more power over it, you can mod it more easily etc.
IMO game developers of multiplayer games should also have to release dedicated servers to anyone that buys their game, so that they are still able to play the game, even if the game developer shuts the servers down, or their country is embargoed by the country where the game developer is located.
That is true, but it also isn't a counter argument to what I said.
Just because the right-wing people are crazy and do not argue based on logic, but on confirmation-bias and personal preconceptions, doesn't mean that the reality itself has liberal bias. There are other ideologies that argue based on logic and observable facts, but are not 'liberal', many social-democrates (or democratic-socialists) for instance, IMO.
Nah, reality doesn't have a liberal bias. "Liberal" is something that humans invented, and not something that comes from reality or some intrinsic part of nature.
LLMs are trained on past written stuff by humans, and humans for a long time have not been ridiculously right wing as the current political climate of the US.
If you train a model on only right wing propaganda, it will not miraculously turn "liberal", it will be right wing. LLMs also argue not more logical than any propagandist, if they were fed by only propaganda.
I dislike it immensely when people argue that LLMs are truthful, unbiased, or somehow "know" or can create more that what was put into them. And connecting them with fundamental reality seems even more tech-bro-brained.
Arguing that "reality" is this or that is also very annoying, because reality doesn't have any intrisic morales or politics that can be measured by logic or science. So many people argue that their morales are better then someone else's, because they where given by god, or by science, this is bullshit. They are all derived by human society, and the same is true by whatever "liberal" means.
And lastly, assuming that some system somehow is "built into reality" shuts down any critique of the system. And critiquing any system in order to improve it is essential for any improvements, which should be part of any progressive thought.
I would agree about getting buying the cheaper version, if it doesn't also might mean buying an EOL product.
If Nintendo stops providing updates and new games of the old switch (soonish) then (what I suspect from console gaming) then suggesting to buy the old product from Nindendo looks like they just want to empty their Switch 1 stockpile.
If Nintendo just treats the Switch 1 and 2 as the same console, with just different performance and price, but get the same support period and games, then I am fully with you.
SFP? You mean the every device has slots to plug in different transceiver modules? I guess that would make it more future proof, but I think that will raise the cost, and might confuse ordinary people.
You have to think about the slot-transceiver compatibility and transceiver-medium compatibility then. Hmm... but I guess that would make it more transparent what is going on than having those chips embedded inside the cables, but not sure if we can leave them out, and require the end users to take care of thinking of all these compatibilities themselves or risk fire hazards.
I know this post is more about the committing on LLM "fixes", but find the other reasons more interesting.
Similar to the date & time library there are a couple of other things that look easy at a first glance, but get complicated very quickly, because it has so many special cases:
lexicographic sorting (different languages sort things differently)
Postal address formatting (different standards in different countries, with many different context sensitive rules)
He is not only attacking the US, he wants to breakup democracies world wide and through causing international crisis and turmoil, push all countries into becoming authoritarian regimes, controlled by oligarchs and one-party systems.
That is the actual goal, and he is doing that while trying to maintain plausible deniability, by staging himself as an incompetent and incoherent buffoon.
And even if he is a real buffoon and doesn't understand the end goal, he has a lot of more intelligent antidemocratic advisors around him that do. This is not coming out of nowhere.
I understand that perfectly, they like the crisis situation because they hope to acquire more, and maybe even loose a couple of aspirant mill- or billionaires on the way.
They do see it as a game, and thus big disruptions create great new chances for them to gain even more.
Well my point is that pretty much all of our laws are build around ethic values, which are developed within a society. There is no logical or scientific reason that would make killing other people bad, but we still should have strict rules about this.
Laws are always built around soft things like "what is obscene", "at what point is someone naked in public", "How much alcohol can a drink have before it is a alcoholic beverage?", "did the person die of natural causes, or was killed by some event years ago, that wasn't properly treated."
Society decides what is acceptable and what isn't and that changes through time and culture.
Your argument is therefore not a good one, you have to make a case based on ethics.
This sort of reminds myself on the discussion on "what is a women". Is Siri a women? Many might say so, but t the same time Siri is not even human.
The question on how old the person on a specific generated image might be and if it even depicts a person at all, can only be answered through society. There is no scientific or any logical answer for this.
So this will always have grey areas and differing opinions and can be rulings in different cultures.
In the end it is about discussions about ethics not logic.
I really hate most subscriptions, because the prices are often too high, they rely on locking stuff behind paywalls, instead of providing a good service.
Here is the difference, I am ok paying monthly for storage space, servers, and hosted/managed open source web services, because there is competition and standard interfaces there. They do not hold you (or your data) hostage to their service, what they provide is good on its own.
For example, if GOG invests money into writing open source libraries, apps and APIs to efficiently and easily share save games between devices. Let people self host the open source backend, but offer up a subscription for a managed instance, with maybe some voting rights for new features or support for games/platforms to be integrated into the open source front & backend, then I would be willing to support this.
And other stuff like this.
Use subscriptions to offer good services, which also allow you to improve the whole ecosystem, while also not putting yourself as the gatekeeper, and locking people into their service.
Yes, currently Valve is mostly interesting in a base system that just runs Steam and games, not a general Linux desktop. Commercial Linux distributions are more about servers and professional workstations.
We either need PC hardware manufacturers or public funding to push Linux desktop, since I don't think that normal users would pay directly for a Linux system.
PC hardware manufacturers however are more about selling the next device that constantly improving a system non-customers could also use for free, so I doubt they would commit to it fully, and instead use it for marketing.
So all that is left is public funding.